Fleet assets

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
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Cranes

Post by mogami »

Originally posted by mdiehl
What "facilities" Leo? What are you talking about?

TIMJOT -

The "facilities" strikes in China fairly fall under the clasification of tactical targets. Granted, there's a fuzzy line between A & B. Japan made no effort to study the strategic effects of engaging a 1st world power with substantial production and repair facilities. The PI airbases "demolished" only in the sense that lot's of a/c destroyed and a few buildings. Japan's only way to shut down an airbase was to keep it stripped of a/c long enough to overrun it with infantry. Everything else at these facilities is easily replaced withing a few weeks provided taht a ship can get there to deliver the needed stuff. Ditto for Cavite.

The only really hard to replace stuff at PH were the heavy lift cranes. All the rest was portable and easily replaced. "Stripping" the West Coast of Cranes would slow down ship building and repair on the west coast. Stripping the WC of other equipment wouldn't stop anything for more than a couple weeks.

Dive bombing a crane would not be accurate enough to do the job. About the only way to have a chance of success would be to suicide bomb the cranes.


Hi, I think we are making cranes into some kind of indestructible beast. What about a simple fighter strafing the beast. If I simply assign 3 bombers with 3 250kg bombs to attack each crane it's going to suffer damage. I only have to hit one leg.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

Originally posted by mdiehl
What "facilities" Leo? What are you talking about?

TIMJOT -

The "facilities" strikes in China fairly fall under the clasification of tactical targets. Granted, there's a fuzzy line between A & B. Japan made no effort to study the strategic effects of engaging a 1st world power with substantial production and repair facilities. The PI airbases "demolished" only in the sense that lot's of a/c destroyed and a few buildings. Japan's only way to shut down an airbase was to keep it stripped of a/c long enough to overrun it with infantry. Everything else at these facilities is easily replaced withing a few weeks provided taht a ship can get there to deliver the needed stuff. Ditto for Cavite.

The only really hard to replace stuff at PH were the heavy lift cranes. All the rest was portable and easily replaced. "Stripping" the West Coast of Cranes would slow down ship building and repair on the west coast. Stripping the WC of other equipment wouldn't stop anything for more than a couple weeks.

Dive bombing a crane would not be accurate enough to do the job. About the only way to have a chance of success would be to suicide bomb the cranes.


Sabotage =)
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Ship Yard Damage

Post by mogami »

Hi, Not to disregard your opinion. How much damage to a ship yard would 150 bombers sent to simply bomb the acreage do?
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

What about a simple fighter strafing the beast. If I simply assign 3 bombers with 3 250kg bombs to attack each crane it's going to suffer damage. I only have to hit one leg.
We're talking about a solid concrete pillbox about the size of a house, that moves on a track. The metal base(s) of the crane (where they emerge from the pillbox) are variously, depending on the size of the crane, around 24" in 'diameter.' They're made out of a super high grade high tensile steel, because the crane has to lift really heavy stuff; so a direct hit and only a direct hit will have a hope to cause damage to a supporting element. Shrapnel will bounce off. Concussion won't blow it out of alignment or topple the pillbox using any weapon in Japan's arsenal. You can scrag the tracks, but these can be replaced in a day. As with most cranes of this type, if you hit one of the elements in the lifting arm (or, on smaller cranes that actually have legs, the beastie in that picture does not have "legs as such") these are modular (just high-grade steel beams) and can be replaced modularly.

Take a look at this picture. The ship is USS California undergoing repair at PH. One of the major cranes is visible, low center. The housing on that beastie is bunker-grade concrete:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/imag ... h83997.jpg

The thingie astride the bow is another crane (a floating crane) that was brought to PH in 1942 via military tug.

Drydocks:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/imag ... h83998.jpg

What exactly is the aiming point for taking out one of those, Mogami? In the spirit of Monty Python's King Arthur talking to the disarmed Black Knight: 'Whatt're ya gonna do? Fill one of them with water?'
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
LTCMTS
Posts: 297
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 3:40 am
Location: Newnan, GA
Contact:

Port Facilities

Post by LTCMTS »

1. High tolerance repair facilities to handle geared turbine plant repairs, fire control systems, and a myriad of other warship technologies in World War II did not grow on trees and were not easy to build, replace or expand, or the US would not have had to use multiple engineering plants for DEs, the British would have had better gearing for their engineering plants in their warships, reducing their fuel consumption and the German power plants wouldn't have kept breaking down. Destroying the turbine maintenance shop at Pearl Harbor would have forced any ship with stripped gears in its reduction box, or worn blades in its turbines to return to Seattle, Mare Island or San Diego for repairs. This is just one example of the complexity of warship technology even in 1941.

2. By the way, the USN did have a "Long Lance" torpedo. The Mk.16 (sub) and Mk.17 (surface) test programs were completed in early 1941 and production was planned for early 1942 upon completion of a hydrogen peroxide (Navol) fuel plant to feed the torpedoes. IIRC Mk.17 could range to 16,000 yds at 46 kts, equivalent to a later Type 93 and with the adoption of TORPEX in 1943, a larger equivalent warhead in TNT. The Mk.16 fully matched the high speed range of the Type 95.
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

I know. I'm saying that Japan having enough strategic sense to follow through with an attack on the PH support facilities is about as likely as the Mk 17 torpedo mounted on US DDs and torp-equipped CLs in 1941.

Turbine shops did, for all intents and purposes, grow on trees in the US in 1942. Repairing the one(s) at PH would have been a piece of cake for the US.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

How much damage to a ship yard would 150 bombers sent to simply bomb the acreage do?
None that could not be fixed in a day.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

Damage

Post by mogami »

Hi, I don't really want to engage in a debate over what damage 150 250KG bombs would do to PH. I don't think they repaired the actual damage in 2 weeks. If I drop a 250KG bomb on your crane track it will not be repaired 2 weeks later. (I don't think spare track is in warehouse and I don't thinkl the surface the track is laid across will be repaired yet. Dropping a bomb near the lock in a dry dock is going to make the dry dock require repair.

These items are not just laying around in warehouses.

86 out of 100 might have been excessive. In WITP repair is supply and engineers. PH is low on supply from day 1. It will require several weeks for supply to begin arriving from west coast. First piority at PH is going to be the airfields, and then port and then repair. (repair will be busy preventing ships damaged in first strike from sinking.)

The motors on your giant pillboxes are all on the outside.
(The cranes at Philly were/are not made of concrete.)

But enough of my opinion. Do air dropped bombs have any effect on land targets?
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

Hi, I don't really want to engage in a debate over what damage 150 250KG bombs would do to PH. I don't think they repaired the actual damage in 2 weeks. If I drop a 250KG bomb on your crane track it will not be repaired 2 weeks later. (I don't think spare track is in warehouse and I don't thinkl the surface the track is laid across will be repaired yet. Dropping a bomb near the lock in a dry dock is going to make the dry dock require repair.
The "actual damage" was largely to ships. Those were not repaired in two weeks. The problem was heavily influenced by the fact that ships have to be patched underwtaer before they'll float. Once they float you have to move em for permanent repair etc. I'm sorry you don't want to debate the effects of the damage, but that IS the heart of the what happens if we "bomb the 'strategic assets'" at PH question.

Re: a 250Kg bomb will do to a RR track. The effects have been widely documented. Major US railroad companies in 1876 could lay 20 MILES of track per DAY (that includes building the substrate as needed). All a track requires is a stable foundation, ties, and iron. So bingo a 250Kg bomb hits. You fill the hole and compact. That takes about an hour, in my experience, monitoring street construction. Depending on the nature of the foundation and fill, maybe a whole day for a really sizeable hole if you want to start adding a concrete substrate. You lay the new ties and rails. That takes about ten minutes for a hole, say, 50 feet in diameter.
These items are not just laying around in warehouses.
Heck YES they are. It's ties, rails, and concrete. It's not like some secret tech or reserved only for military use. You could fly the darned stuff out from the west coast in a day (more or less depending on the number of holes you wanted to fill) if you did noty have a heap of it to hand. Rail stock and ties could be found in warehouses aplenty throughout the US in 1941 and had it become a critical resource there were hundreds of miles of unused line that could have been pulled up and recycled. Believe me the rail tracks for this thing are trivial to replace.
86 out of 100 might have been excessive. In WITP repair is supply and engineers. PH is low on supply from day 1. It will require several weeks for supply to begin arriving from west coast. First piority at PH is going to be the airfields, and then port and then repair. (repair will be busy preventing ships damaged in first strike from sinking.)
PH is low on supply because of what? The bombing? What sort of supply is lacking? Engineers? Does the game model assume that all the engineers in PH are sitting around a table in abuilding with a sign on the roof that says "Civil Engineering Division: Bomb Here?"

Repair teams don't work that way. The Civil Engineers whose specialty is substrate, rail lines and runways are not going to be involved in ship damage control because they're not going to know anything about it. For that sort of stuff you'd need mechanical engineers that specialize in naval design (like my cousins).

If that's the way Matrix is thinking about repair facilities then this stuff should just be removed from the target list. The only way you're going to wipe out the engineers from the general civil population is to kill most of the civilians. That'd be one really big, soft, amorphous target and would take many more days of bombing than KB can deliver.
The motors on your giant pillboxes are all on the outside.
(The cranes at Philly were/are not made of concrete.)
A motor is a piece of cake to fix. I'm not sure what drives the beastie in the given photo to move it along the rails. I suspect it's the locomotive at center-right. If so, that locomotive is your best target. I think that the US could quickly find a spare locomotive among the 900 or so surplus locomotives that we gave to the USSR.
But enough of my opinion. Do air dropped bombs have any effect on land targets?
Well, yeah, but the effect depends on the target. Take a runway for example. You can crater it to pieces. Depending on how the runway's mad eand what it needs to hold, this can be a critical kill or just another ho-hum repair. Cratering a runway will prevent the Concorde from landing there for a darned long time, but not a 747. Definitely little effect on, say, a C47 or B17 once the rubbish is removed and the hole is filled and compacted (or covered with marston matting).

You can bomb warehouse. These can be rebuilt with wood frame and tin. A few weeks required, tops. Really, anything in PH can be rebuilt or replaced quickly. To mess up a turbine machine shop, for example, you'd need to destroy machine tools like lathes. Basically, the USAAF in Europe discovered that while you can really make a shambles of floor space, ruining machine tools is really hard to do. It requires an intense melting fire or blast damage so big and thorough and dense that big solid steel thingies shear from the blast effects.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

It seems to me that the thrust of Mdeihl's argument is that he doesnt wish to see Japan have any alternative to a traditional
attack on the BB.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

No. The "thrust" of my argument is that you should not just "make up some sh_t" as a substitute for research. I have no problem with giving the Jpn player the option of hanging around off Oahu for a week, trying to achieve the damned-near-impossible, only to learn the hard way that after all that effort and sacrifice, the runways are back in operation a day after you bomb them and the cranes are lifting turrets a week after that.

I have a big problem with pretending that this job is, even with strenuous effort, likely to be accomplished by Kido Butai, given that the USAAF in the ETO was rarely able to accomplish comparable damage to Mogami's AAR using aircraft, munitions, and tactics much better suited for this kind of job.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

Originally posted by mdiehl
No. The "thrust" of my argument is that you should not just "make up some sh_t" as a substitute for research. I have no problem with giving the Jpn player the option of hanging around off Oahu for a week, trying to achieve the damned-near-impossible, only to learn the hard way that after all that effort and sacrifice, the runways are back in operation a day after you bomb them and the cranes are lifting turrets a week after that.

I have a big problem with pretending that this job is, even with strenuous effort, likely to be accomplished by Kido Butai, given that the USAAF in the ETO was rarely able to accomplish comparable damage to Mogami's AAR using aircraft, munitions, and tactics much better suited for this kind of job.


Well Mdiehl you place yourself in front of some serious heavyweights in the field of history by saying that.

Among them, Morrison, JFD, and Toland.

No sitting around Oahu would be a disaster that I agree.
However a special strike on something OTHER than the BB
IS a possibility. All the training you see lavished upon ship
attacks could just as easily been lavished on installations.

I dont agree that the cranes are the essence of the viability.
The cranes are merely a feature, and no more than that.

I would say sowing the entire harbor with magnetic mines and simply leaving would have a far greater effect than anything mentioned so far.

Germany had magnetic mines in 1940. It isnt a big leap to suggest
Japan could have, perhaps they did. I cant say.


Your options are only limited by your imagination.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

Well Mdiehl you place yourself in front of some serious heavyweights in the field of history by saying that.

Among them, Morrison, JFD, and Toland.
Whoopity doo. If they'd studied the nuts and bolts of it they'd understand why it was a bad idea.
No sitting around Oahu would be a disaster that I agree.
However a special strike on something OTHER than the BB
IS a possibility. All the training you see lavished upon ship
attacks could just as easily been lavished on installations.

I dont agree that the cranes are the essence of the viability.
The cranes are merely a feature, and no more than that.
I'm game. Name the installation.

So far it's not personnel (unless you gas Pearl Harbor), runways, cranes, RR tracks, or warehouses. Machine tools are a good bet but, unlike Morrison, we all can look to analogous situations and data to evaluate the likely effects. If 8th AF couldn't get 86% damage on an installation (mind you, that's damage to floor space), why would any living rational being think Kido Butai could?

IMO the only good target is the oil tanks. They're hard to blast down. Harder still to burn. They're easily replaceable. Oil tanks are very low tech in the world of things used to support a military. But if you can rip one wide open or set the contents on fire, you can do some serious local damage.

The relevant question, then, IMO, is "What happens if Japan succeeds in emptying these tanks?" How long would it take to produce a comparable quantity of fuel oil and ship it via tanker to Hawaii?
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

Originally posted by mdiehl
Whoopity doo. If they'd studied the nuts and bolts of it they'd understand why it was a bad idea.



I'm game. Name the installation.

So far it's not personnel (unless you gas Pearl Harbor), runways, cranes, RR tracks, or warehouses. Machine tools are a good bet but, unlike Morrison, we all can look to analogous situations and data to evaluate the likely effects. If 8th AF couldn't get 86% damage on an installation (mind you, that's damage to floor space), why would any living rational being think Kido Butai could?

IMO the only good target is the oil tanks. They're hard to blast down. Harder still to burn. They're easily replaceable. Oil tanks are very low tech in the world of things used to support a military. But if you can rip one wide open or set the contents on fire, you can do some serious local damage.

The relevant question, then, IMO, is "What happens if Japan succeeds in emptying these tanks?" How long would it take to produce a comparable quantity of fuel oil and ship it via tanker to Hawaii?


Using UV as an example... to replace the arbitrary 300 fuel

Not very long.
ONE oiler in UV contains 5000 oil.

Then again they may have changed the system. I am not in beta
I cant say.

I myself would have tried to hit the OIL and the Oilers AND
the specialized sub yards. Because I hate USN subs.
But that is just me. I would use the Zero's to strafe the airfields
and destroy the enemy planes.

BUT Mines are still an interesting thought. Especially with that
narrow channel.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

PH

Post by mogami »

Hi, PH had 4.5 million barrels of oil on Dec 7th.
Witp has 300,000 fuel points (not 300)At PH
Oilers and Tankers in WITP go up to 20,500 fuel points
(Avg tanker carries 9000 fuel points)

There are Minesweepers at PH on Dec 7th. I'd like to target subs as well.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

So about 35 tanker loads replaces all the oil at PH. Not a big problem for the US. Here's the catch 22: if you don't sink the US BBs the US needs the oil to use them on a long distance campaign. Any contemplated invasion of PH, however, is auto-scrubbed. If you sink the BBs, the US does not need most of that oil in the short run. You of necessity haven't enough munitions and a/c to also move against the land installations and all those other proposed targets.
I myself would have tried to hit the OIL and the Oilers AND the specialized sub yards. Because I hate USN subs.
But that is just me. I would use the Zero's to strafe the airfields
and destroy the enemy planes.

BUT Mines are still an interesting thought. Especially with that
narrow channel.
What "specialized sub yards" would those be? Nothing irreplaceable there. Well. One irreplaceable thing. There was an old converted ex Protected Cruiser (ex Kearsarge I think) from the 1890s sitting there as a sub tender. New sub tenders could be had aplenty, but none with such piquant savior faire.

To do anything to the strategic sub war, you need to find out where the torpedoes are stored and hit them. Ten times as effective as bombing the subs themselves.

Mines are no big deal. Clear channel in a week.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

Originally posted by mdiehl
So about 35 tanker loads replaces all the oil at PH. Not a big problem for the US. Here's the catch 22: if you don't sink the US BBs the US needs the oil to use them on a long distance campaign. Any contemplated invasion of PH, however, is auto-scrubbed. If you sink the BBs, the US does not need most of that oil in the short run. You of necessity haven't enough munitions and a/c to also move against the land installations and all those other proposed targets.



What "specialized sub yards" would those be? Nothing irreplaceable there. Well. One irreplaceable thing. There was an old converted ex Protected Cruiser (ex Kearsarge I think) from the 1890s sitting there as a sub tender. New sub tenders could be had aplenty, but none with such piquant savior faire.

To do anything to the strategic sub war, you need to find out where the torpedoes are stored and hit them. Ten times as effective as bombing the subs themselves.

Mines are no big deal. Clear channel in a week.


Charleston harbor was shut down for an entire month by 12 mines! (laid by u-boats)

So I dont agree that it would be that easy. In this case we DO have a historical background to compare it with.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
User avatar
pasternakski
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm

Post by pasternakski »

Mdiehl, why do you bother to feed this monkey? Your points are valid and worthy of discussion and approval, but those of us who sit here in silence (and bewilderment) have long since given up on trying to talk sense to the deranged.

"I myself would have tried to hit the OIL and the Oilers AND
the specialized sub yards. Because I hate USN subs.
But that is just me. I would use the Zero's to strafe the airfields
and destroy the enemy planes."

Yesus kristi sacademenski putzam.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
Chiteng
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Raleigh,nc,usa

Post by Chiteng »

Originally posted by pasternakski
Mdiehl, why do you bother to feed this monkey? Your points are valid and worthy of discussion and approval, but those of us who sit here in silence (and bewilderment) have long since given up on trying to talk sense to the deranged.

"I myself would have tried to hit the OIL and the Oilers AND
the specialized sub yards. Because I hate USN subs.
But that is just me. I would use the Zero's to strafe the airfields
and destroy the enemy planes."

Yesus kristi sacademenski putzam.


Typical of Pasternaski, contribute nothing, disparage and name call.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest

"Statistic
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mdiehl »

I keep hoping he'll rehab and start showing up at the round table with something credible. Like the Charleston Harbor thing. So far I've found one instance of Charleston Harbor being mined by U Boats.

September 18, 1942: A German U-boat laid a dozen mines off Charleston, South Carolina. None were ever struck.

No instance of the Charelston Harbor closed on account of mines since the American Civil War that I can find. I suppose I should add that changes in minesweeping technology make the anecdote somewhat dubious with respect to minesweeping and mine effectiveness.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
Post Reply

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