B5M1 Mabel vs. B5N2 Kate

[FatR]

I suspect CV2 is trolling. I wasn't able to fly 4Es units at their full strength with less than 2 days of rest for 1 say of combat missions even from a size 9 airfield with an Air HQ (for unlimited stacking, although the number of groups was lower than 9 + HQ radius anyway) and over 250 air support (which counts as unlimited air support).

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

If you leave P38s on CAP at say, 30% CAP, you'll run them into the ground fairly fast.

I never had. 30-40% CAP left them just fine. Then again, I only had them operating from my best airfields, always with sufficient air support. And also set the percentage for rest (usually 50%).

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: CV 2
As for why you are so short on av support I suspect that is because you didnt bother to pull any out of the DEI / PI.

[:D]

No - it's more because I got so many aircraft!

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: FatR
Then again, I only had them operating from my best airfields, always with sufficient air support. And also set the percentage for rest (usually 50%).

Yeah, I don't like doing that, that seems to be asking for it.

I tend to set them to 0 or 10% CAP and hope the radar works generally nowadays.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: CV 2

4 times what you need? Level 6 airfield can operate 300 aircraft.

I don't really pay much attention to the precise number of aircraft, the administrative issue (ie number of groups) is usually the limiting factor on efficiency, I find.

10 squadrons of 12 B24s, plus a couple of squadrons of fighters to protect them, and maybe some USMC Dauntlesses to keep bombardment TFs away, is already nudging up against admin limits unless you stand things down, and I rarely do that. And thats only going to be about 200 aircraft, if that.

Then I find moving them up is a pain in the ass too, as you have to fairly frequently relocate the whole lot as the front line moves forwards, and then with service rating 4 sometimes they take over 20 days to uncrate from an AK...

[CV 2]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: CV 2

4 times what you need? Level 6 airfield can operate 300 aircraft.

I don't really pay much attention to the precise number of aircraft, the administrative issue (ie number of groups) is usually the limiting factor on efficiency, I find.

10 squadrons of 12 B24s, plus a couple of squadrons of fighters to protect them, and maybe some USMC Dauntlesses to keep bombardment TFs away, is already nudging up against admin limits unless you stand things down, and I rarely do that. And thats only going to be about 200 aircraft, if that.

Then I find moving them up is a pain in the ass too, as you have to fairly frequently relocate the whole lot as the front line moves forwards, and then with service rating 4 sometimes they take over 20 days to uncrate from an AK...

Searches (naval and ASW) can be performed from Palm Island. Put 1 air HQ in there and you can fly 11 groups without any of the BS "admin stacking" problems. 8 B-17s and 3 CAP if you want, although I usually run my CAP out of Charters Towers.

As for "moving up" I guess I dont understand. Are you saying that as YOUR line moves forward you do NOT advance any airplanes with it? 5th and 11th airforce (180 av each) teamed with 1 of them air base units from Java (100 av) each is 250+ (times 2) av in 4 very small units. Plus you have a truckload of 90 av army and 1 (I think) marine av unit that make very good units to land on nearby fields for fighter/naval strike cover. Cant imagine anything EASIER than hop-scotching with these 4 units in dual tandems (plus dragging 2 of the 90 av along for other bases with them since you have at least 4 of these units that I know of).

And again, service rating is a JOKE if you do it my way. But hey, do it any way you want.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: CV 2
And again, service rating is a JOKE if you do it my way. But hey, do it any way you want.

OK, great master. [&o]

Your life is just so worthy of accolade. It is a privilege to be allowed within Your holy sphere so I might bask in the reflected glory of your genius and intellect, while averting my weak eyes, of course, for direct observation of Your splendour risks blindness.

[Sun Tempest]

I think that the same service rating for a land base plane is (or can be made) less harsh than the similar service rating of a carrier plane.
At the same time, how important is endurance for planes with a similar attack range?

[EUBanana]

regarding the OP,

1) I don't think service rating 2 is harsh enough to be hugely noticeable even in the worst of times,

2) carrier ops involve short sharp actions for which service rating likely isnt that relevant unless you have day 3 action going on in which case it might make a slight impact. It's more of an issue when you are talking about sustained operations, like P38s on CAP day in, day out

3) Only time Mabels are likely to be flying day in day out is naval search. Just dont use them for naval search and use Vals instead?

[CV 2]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

regarding the OP,

1) I don't think service rating 2 is harsh enough to be hugely noticeable even in the worst of times,

2) carrier ops involve short sharp actions for which service rating likely isnt that relevant unless you have day 3 action going on in which case it might make a slight impact. It's more of an issue when you are talking about sustained operations, like P38s on CAP day in, day out

3) Only time Mabels are likely to be flying day in day out is naval search. Just dont use them for naval search and use Vals instead?

Why would you use P-38s for CAP? You use your short range fighters for that and use long range planes for escort. As for using Japanese carrier strike aircraft for searching, thats kind of a waste also when your cruisers carry so many Jakes. Dont take up writing advice columns for a living [:D]

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: CV 2
Why would you use P-38s for CAP? You use your short range fighters for that and use long range planes for escort. As for using Japanese carrier strike aircraft for searching, thats kind of a waste also when your cruisers carry so many Jakes. Dont take up writing advice columns for a living [:D]

Lo, the Great One hath spoken. [&o]

And all ye heathen, take note of His Terrible Word!

[topeverest]

getting rough in here...

[Sredni]

Just to clear some things up here... Each field can support 50 engines (not 50 aircraft), and until you reach level 9 airfields you're stuck with this as HQ's don't effect how many engines you can stack on an airfield. HQ's only effect administrative stacking (number of groups).

A level 8 field can support 400 engines, which = 8 12 plane bomber groups. Each 12 plane group is pretty much 1 field all by itself (48 engines, more if you do 12+4). 2 25 plane fighter groups is one fields worth of engines (and again you'll go over if you have 25+4). 1 25 plane group of p-38's is one field (which is what renders p-38's less then worthwhile imho). Float planes don't count against this at all and only use up AV (1 plane = 1 AV up to the max of 250).

Also... townsville to rabaul is 24 hexes, beyond the range of b-17e's in both the guadalcanal scenario and the campaign (they have different stats in the different scenario's I guess), is there a scenario where they have the range? b-17f's can reach from townseville to rabaul in the guad. scenario but not in the campaign. Ditto the b-24d's. But the campaign lets you build up port moresby to level 9 AF whereas guadalcanal doesn't.

And to provide an example of 4e bombers bombing unescorted at long range vs heavy cap I conducted a port strike at 9000 feet by 2x12 b-17e's out of port moresby, 2x12 b17f's out of townsville and 3x12 b-24d's out of townsville. The cap was pretty heavy, around 3 times the fighters then bombers attacking. PM and townsville both have excess supply and 250+ AV.

Losses for the days adventure include:
A6M2 Zero: 6
A6M3 Zero: 4
Ki-43-IC Oscar: 3
B17e:11
B17f:9
B24d:16

Most of these losses were air to air, with only 1 flak loss and 1 or 2 ops loss per plane type. The bomber groups all have at least 3 planes repairing the next day, and they're all heavily understrength now. They're also all short pilots since most of those losses end up being KIA's over rabaul. Looking at the groups planes their fatigue levels (the planes not the pilots) have also all shot up to 20 or more from the 10ish they were all at to begin with. Using the bombers a second day would see their fatigue levels go to 30+.

84 bombers left their AF's, 48 came back. 43% bomber losses arn't sustainable with the production numbers the allies get.

Apologies to the OP for helping to derail this thread.

[Sun Tempest]

ORIGINAL: Sredni

Just to clear some things up here... Each field can support 50 engines (not 50 aircraft), and until you reach level 9 airfields you're stuck with this as HQ's don't effect how many engines you can stack on an airfield. HQ's only effect administrative stacking (number of groups).

A level 8 field can support 400 engines, which = 8 12 plane bomber groups. Each 12 plane group is pretty much 1 field all by itself (48 engines, more if you do 12+4). 2 25 plane fighter groups is one fields worth of engines (and again you'll go over if you have 25+4). 1 25 plane group of p-38's is one field (which is what renders p-38's less then worthwhile imho). Float planes don't count against this at all and only use up AV (1 plane = 1 AV up to the max of 250).

Also... townsville to rabaul is 24 hexes, beyond the range of b-17e's in both the guadalcanal scenario and the campaign (they have different stats in the different scenario's I guess), is there a scenario where they have the range? b-17f's can reach from townseville to rabaul in the guad. scenario but not in the campaign. Ditto the b-24d's. But the campaign lets you build up port moresby to level 9 AF whereas guadalcanal doesn't.

And to provide an example of 4e bombers bombing unescorted at long range vs heavy cap I conducted a port strike at 9000 feet by 2x12 b-17e's out of port moresby, 2x12 b17f's out of townsville and 3x12 b-24d's out of townsville. The cap was pretty heavy, around 3 times the fighters then bombers attacking. PM and townsville both have excess supply and 250+ AV.

Losses for the days adventure include:
A6M2 Zero: 6
A6M3 Zero: 4
Ki-43-IC Oscar: 3
B17e:11
B17f:9
B24d:16

Most of these losses were air to air, with only 1 flak loss and 1 or 2 ops loss per plane type. The bomber groups all have at least 3 planes repairing the next day, and they're all heavily understrength now. They're also all short pilots since most of those losses end up being KIA's over rabaul. Looking at the groups planes their fatigue levels (the planes not the pilots) have also all shot up to 20 or more from the 10ish they were all at to begin with. Using the bombers a second day would see their fatigue levels go to 30+.

84 bombers left their AF's, 48 came back. 43% bomber losses arn't sustainable with the production numbers the allies get.

Apologies to the OP for helping to derail this thread.

Invaluable piece of information. +rep[&o]
This forum really needs a reputation button[:)]