Call for change input

[TIMJOT]

Since Merchant shipping seems to be a point of emphasis, something to consider. You already have the "VeryLgAPs"(ocean liners) you might want to consider adding a new class "LargeFastAPs". Specifically the famous Matson Liners Mariposa, Lurline, Montery and the President Coolidge.

Now, you already have the Mariposa and Coolidge but as LargeSlow APs. The Mariposa and her sisters were 18,000ton 22knot liners. The Coolidge was the Flagship of the APL and at 21,000tons and 20knots much faster and larger than the rest of her sister President liners.

The Montery spent a lot of time in the ETO and maybe shouldnt be included but the Lurline along with the Mariposa as far as I know spent the vast majority if not all their time in the PTO plying the SF to OZ route.

There is a case that can be made to warrant their inclusion over the VeryLg APs Westpoint and Wakefield historically spent substantial amount of time in the ETO. I understand all three deliveried the 18th Div. to Singapore early in the war but the Wakefield for instance made 23 round trips in the ETO and only 3 in the PTO during the war. The Westpoint no more than 50% of her time in the PTO. Only the Mount Vernon spent the majority of the time in the PTO plying there exclusively until mid 1944 when it was sent to the Altantic to help with the build up on the continent before returning to the PTO.

[TIMJOT]

The President Coolidge

[TIMJOT]

A possible President Coolidge for the game

[TIMJOT]

The Lurline, Mariposa, Montery

[TIMJOT]

Possible game version

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Hello Don

A few things I noticed.

1) 70th FS starts the game with P-39s. I think this should be changed to P-36s and upgrade to P-39s, because the squadron was flying P-36s up to embarking on Dec 5, 1941. As you know it was to upgrade to P-40E upon reaching the PI. According to the 70th unit history none of the pilots had ever seen a P-39 until they uncrated them on the beach in Fiji in February 42.

This one has been argued back and forth many times.

Background: The 35th Fighter Group was in the process of being transferred to the Philippines. Two squadrons had already arrived (and were temporarily attached to the 24th Group). Both of these squadrons arrived WITHOUT AIRCRAFT and were both temporarily assigned available aircraft, mostly P-35, until their new P-40s arrived. The 21st Squadron (35th Group) in the Philippines had already been re-equipped with P-40E. The 34th Squadron, 35th Group, had recently arrived and been handed down the tired old P-35s. 18 P-40E for the 34th Squadron were aboard the Pensacola Convoy and, of course, never arrived.

The 70th Squadron had been equipped with P-36 prior to embarkation - it was at sea 12/7/41 enroute the Philippines. The convoy turned around after Pearl Harbor and the squadron re-equipped with P-39 on returning to San Francisco. The question is whether or not the P-36 were still with the 70th while it was at sea. I believe they were not:
[ol]
[*] The other two squadrons of the 35th were sent to the Philippines without aircraft and equipped there.
[*] The three squadrons of the 27th Light Bomb Group were sent without aircraft and the aircraft sent later (also in the Pensacola Convoy).
[*] Shipping was very scarce and space for 18 obsolete aircraft would be a waste.
[*] A shipment of 55 P-40E left San Francisco 12/15/41 aboard the President Polk (bound for Australia). Some of these aircraft may have been those intended to completely re-equip the 35th Group and perhaps to upgrade the 24th Group as well.
[/ol]

I believe the 70th had shed it's P-36 and it's intended P-40s were to be shipped separately. Since it was fully equipped with P-39 within a week I have decided it to appropriate to so equip it on the first day of the war.

2) The 68th FS enters the game equiped with P-39s. Historically it deployed to the PTO with P-40E.

The 68th was the Squadron that went to Tongatabu in early 1942. It's squadron history lists P-36, P-40 and P-43 in 1941 and P-38, P-39, P-40 and P-400 in 1942. Apparently it spent a few months in Australia working up and delivering P-39 and P-40 before going to Tongatabu in May. I have seen several reports of a mixed P-39/P-40 complement prior to Tongatabu but the squadron apparently converted to P-40E on or immediately after arrival. I do not now recall why I decided on P-39 but inertia is on the side of leaving it that way.

3) The 11th BS equiped with A-24s[&:]. This unit was part of the 7th BG (Hvy). Along with its sister units the 9th & and 22nd BS it was to be equiped with B-17Es and sent to the PI. However at the outbreak of war there were not enough available and it was instead equiped with LB-30s and deployed along with the other two Squadrons of the group(B-17Es) to the NEIs via the South America/Africa/India ferry route. Curiously in 43 it changed over to B-25s and was re-designated a Medium BS but remained under the 7th Heavy BG organisational umbrella. Perhaps this is why you have them starting out with A-24s. IMHO the 11th LB-30s upgadeing to B-25s is the historical way to go and if they are going to retain SE Asia HQ then they should enter the game peicemeal at Karachi starting in early January.

This is a mistake - should be B-17E.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Since Merchant shipping seems to be a point of emphasis, something to consider. You already have the "VeryLgAPs"(ocean liners) you might want to consider adding a new class "LargeFastAPs". Specifically the famous Matson Liners Mariposa, Lurline, Montery and the President Coolidge.

Now, you already have the Mariposa and Coolidge but as LargeSlow APs. The Mariposa and her sisters were 18,000ton 22knot liners. The Coolidge was the Flagship of the APL and at 21,000tons and 20knots much faster and larger than the rest of her sister President liners.

The Montery spent a lot of time in the ETO and maybe shouldnt be included but the Lurline along with the Mariposa as far as I know spent the vast majority if not all their time in the PTO plying the SF to OZ route.

There is a case that can be made to warrant their inclusion over the VeryLg APs Westpoint and Wakefield historically spent substantial amount of time in the ETO. I understand all three deliveried the 18th Div. to Singapore early in the war but the Wakefield for instance made 23 round trips in the ETO and only 3 in the PTO during the war. The Westpoint no more than 50% of her time in the PTO. Only the Mount Vernon spent the majority of the time in the PTO plying there exclusively until mid 1944 when it was sent to the Altantic to help with the build up on the continent before returning to the PTO.

Thanks - I'll look into this but the Japanese Fan Boys will bitch. Could you please send me the bmp versions of your two icons?

Don

[TIMJOT]

The 70th Squadron had been equipped with P-36 prior to embarkation - it was at sea 12/7/41 enroute the Philippines. The convoy turned around after Pearl Harbor and the squadron re-equipped with P-39 on returning to San Francisco. The question is whether or not the P-36 were still with the 70th while it was at sea.

No longer saying they must be embarked, but they were flying P-36s up to 12/5/41 so if they are going to be in SF on December 7th then IMHO they should be so equiped. The US deployement is overly quick as it is without an additional early upgrade.

A shipment of 55 P-40E left San Francisco 12/15/41 aboard the President Polk (bound for Australia). Some of these aircraft may have been those intended to completely re-equip the 35th Group and perhaps to upgrade the 24th Group as well.

Yes these aircraft and the 18 P-40E in the Pencecola convoy, were initially intended to be ferried to the FEAF in the PI via Darwin, Timore, Celebes, Mindanao. Several dozen pilots from the FEAFs 24th group were airlifted from the PI to do so. But the fall of Menado. Kendari, Ambon in succession pretty much nixed the idea. They were instead used to fill out the 5 provisional squadrons formed in Oz in early 42.

I believe the 70th had shed it's P-36 and it's intended P-40s were to be shipped separately. Since it was fully equipped with P-39 within a week I have decided it to appropriate to so equip it on the first day of the war

I am curious were did you find that they had been fully equiped with P-39s within a week? The 70th FS history states none of the pilots had seen or flown a P-39 before uncrateing them on the beach in Fiji. They didnt re-embark and sail for Fiji until the 2nd week of Janaury.

OH BTW, I think I may have stumbled upon the 70th FS missing aircraft. Just been reading Bartch's "Doomed at the Start" and he has, as we knew the 34th FS's 18 P-40s sailing on the Pencecola convoy. Expecting to arrive in the PI on January 3rd. BUT, he also states that an additional 20 P-40Es were aboard the SS Lundington schedule to arrive a week later on January 10th. Now since the Pencecola convoy was around Canton on December 7th. Wouldnt a ship arriving a week later put it close to the departure of the Johnson convoy from SF on the December 5th? Havent been able to find much information on the Lundington other than it was perhaps a Great lakes type Freighter. Do you have any sources that would have additional info on the Lundington's history? I never came accross the Ludington as being one of the ships bringing initail aircraft to Oz. I am going to guess it may have been diverted to replenish the PH fighter squadrons.

The 68th was the Squadron that went to Tongatabu in early 1942. It's squadron history lists P-36, P-40 and P-43 in 1941 and P-38, P-39, P-40 and P-400 in 1942. Apparently it spent a few months in Australia working up and delivering P-39 and P-40 before going to Tongatabu in May. I have seen several reports of a mixed P-39/P-40 complement prior to Tongatabu but the squadron apparently converted to P-40E on or immediately after arrival. I do not now recall why I decided on P-39 but inertia is on the side of leaving it that way

The USAAF history of WWII and 454th FG history has them deploying to Tonga with P-40E after you correctly state ferrying duties in Oz. Since its first operational deployment was the P40E I would think that would be the proper aircraft to start with, but perhaps an upgrade to P-40E would do as well.

This is a mistake - should be B-17E

Why B-17Es? Edmunds "They fought with what the had" Shores " Bloody Shambles II and the 11 BS history site has them deploying to SEA with LB-30s. I would think one of the main advantages of breaking airgroups down to squadrons is to allow for the historical mixed aircraft compliments within groups. The 11th BS did fly LB-30s operationally in the NEIs campaign afterall.

[Halsey]

Why should there be a complaint?[;)]

As it stands now Japan never has to return the extra merchant shipping that it borrowed from the civil authorities at the start of the war.

Thanks TIMJOT.

I've posted more than a few threads about adding the liners, but was always shot down by the Matrix groupies. So I gave up. Something absurd about using the QE and QM in amph assaults.[;)]

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Why should there be a complaint?[;)]

As it stands now Japan never has to return the extra merchant shipping that it borrowed from the civil authorities at the start of the war.

Thanks TIMJOT.

I've posted more than a few threads about adding the liners, but was always shot down by the Matrix groupies. So I gave up. Something absurd about using the QE and QM in amph assaults.[;)]

Well they do have a point to an extent regarding some of the liners. Wereas the QE and QM made some important contributions they simply didnt spend enough time in the PTO to warrant their inclusion, without any sort of withdrawl requirement for them. The same argruement can be made for the Wakefield and Westpoint. They took part in some very important convoys in the PTO and IO but the Wakefield in particular spent only very limited time in the PTO and probably shouldnt be included. The Westpoint only about have the time and can be argued either way. But there is really no arguement that can be made against the inclusion of the Mnt Vernon, Mariposa, Lurine and President Coolidge as Fast Liners.

I dont think any player would be crazy enough to use these valuable fast troop movers for amphib assault but just in case maybe a very limited AA armament and high VP price would further disuage player abusing them in this manner.

[tsimmonds]

Something absurd about using the QE and QM in amph assaults.

It is absurd. In an amph assault speed and capacity count for zip. The only thing that matters is how many bottoms you have and how fast you can get them all unloaded. Those big fast APs are useful only between ports. Big ports.....

[Don Bowen]

We're reaching the end of my information on the 70th. I know it was two days out at the time of Pearl Harbor, turned around, unloaded, and moved to Hamilton Field. There is was allocated P-39s and the squadron with the P-39s were loaded for transport to Fiji, departing January 12th. If they saw, assembled, or flew the P-39s during this brief period I do not know. A little simple math shows they had very little time: returned 12/9, left 1/12, with unloading and reloading time. However, I am firmly convinced the P-36 is not the proper aircraft for this squadron.


On the 11th Bombardment, I believe they were flying B-17(D?? E??) on December 7th. They did fly LB-30 very soon thereafter, perhaps due to a consolidation of available aircraft to fully equip squadrons. However, they were flying B-17 the day the war broke out.


68th can be P-39 or P-40, or P-39 with upgrade to P-40. Perhaps P-40E is best.


Now, to the interesting part. I can find no data on the cargo of the Ludington. There was a U.S. Army Transport of this name, launched in 1920 and in Army service between the wars and that could be the ship. I can not find her location 12/7/41 nor any of her wartime history except for an undated photograph of her entering San Francisco.

I did find some additional data on P-40 shipments. There were two ships at sea 12/7/41 with P-40s: Mariposa with 19 P-40Es and Coolidge with 32 P-40Es. Both these ships left San Francisco before Pearl Harbor. Note that all U.S. ships destined for the Philippines were first sent to Pearl Harbor for grouping into convoys. These two ships (and others) eventually arrived in Australia as part of the "Phoenix" convoy. It may be Mariposa that was carrying the 70th Squadron's P-40s.

[TIMJOT]

We're reaching the end of my information on the 70th. I know it was two days out at the time of Pearl Harbor, turned around, unloaded, and moved to Hamilton Field. There is was allocated P-39s and the squadron with the P-39s were loaded for transport to Fiji, departing January 12th. If they saw, assembled, or flew the P-39s during this brief period I do not know. A little simple math shows they had very little time: returned 12/9, left 1/12, with unloading and reloading time. However, I am firmly convinced the P-36 is not the proper aircraft for this squadron.

Not to belabor this, because ultimately its your decision and certainly your perogative, but I truely dont understand your rational. If war had started the 4th December they would have been equiped with P-36s if they had not embarked on the 5th they most certainly still been equiped with P-36s on the 7th. They did not historically re-embark until the 12th January. Certainly five game weeks gives a player enough time to upgrade them to P-39s if he so wishes. Starting them out with P-39s just allows a player to deploy them all the quicker in a game that already allows the allies too much, too quickly, too early.

On the 11th Bombardment, I believe they were flying B-17(D?? E??) on December 7th. They did fly LB-30 very soon thereafter, perhaps due to a consolidation of available aircraft to fully equip squadrons. However, they were flying B-17 the day the war broke out.

The 7th BG were flying B-17Ds in the process of upgradeing to B-17Es. When war broke out there were only enough B-17Es to fill out the 9th and 22nd Squadrons. So the 11th BS had to be filled out with LB-30s. In fact three LB-30s of the 11th Squadron were the first Bombers of the 7th group to reach Java via the S.America/Africa/India ferry route. If your not going to have the 11th with LB-30s then frankly dont see the need for them to be in the game since as far as I know the 7th BG was the only USAAF unit to fly them on combat missions in the PTO.

Now, to the interesting part. I can find no data on the cargo of the Ludington. There was a U.S. Army Transport of this name, launched in 1920 and in Army service between the wars and that could be the ship. I can not find her location 12/7/41 nor any of her wartime history except for an undated photograph of her entering San Francisco.

Yes, I cant find much info on her either. But if she was a week behind the Pencecola convoy it would most likey put her in the group of ships that left SF independently on the 5th ( Pres.Johnson, Pres.Garfield and Etolin ) as this was to be the next big convoy to be formed in Hawaii and sent to the PI.

I did find some additional data on P-40 shipments. There were two ships at sea 12/7/41 with P-40s: Mariposa with 19 P-40Es and Coolidge with 32 P-40Es. Both these ships left San Francisco before Pearl Harbor. Note that all U.S. ships destined for the Philippines were first sent to Pearl Harbor for grouping into convoys. These two ships (and others) eventually arrived in Australia as part of the "Phoenix" convoy. It may be Mariposa that was carrying the 70th Squadron's P-40s

Don I believe you are mistaken about this. I dont think the Mariposa was carrying P-40s or even at sea on December 7th. Her sister the Lurline was half way to Hawaii on her normal passenger service schedule on the 7th. She quickly turned around for SF upon hearing of the attack. The Coolidge on the otherhand was at sea but off the Solomon Islands along with the USAT Winfield Scott and ecorted by the Louiville. It was returning from the PI after unloading the last major convoy to reach the ilands. Bringing amoung others the 21st and 34th FS, as well as most the personel of the 27th BG and 5th Airbase unit.

The Phoenix convoy did include the Mariposa and Coolidge but that didnt leave SF until January 10th and it was carrying mainly the 49th Pursuit group it's and assorted other aircraft (including 6 DB-7s for the Dutch) along with 808th EAB other personel.

Not trying to nitpick here just offering some information for your consideration.

Regards

PS I will send you the BMPs as soon as I can.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

Not to belabor this, because ultimately its your decision and certainly your perogative, but I truely dont understand your rational. If war had started the 4th December they would have been equiped with P-36s if they had not embarked on the 5th they most certainly still been equiped with P-36s on the 7th. They did not historically re-embark until the 12th January. Certainly five game weeks gives a player enough time to upgrade them to P-39s if he so wishes. Starting them out with P-39s just allows a player to deploy them all the quicker in a game that already allows the allies too much, too quickly, too early.

Yes, but the war did not begin on 12/4 or 12/5 and by the time it did I believe the 70th had turned in their P-36s and therefore I do not believe it is appropriate to assign them P-36s.

The 7th BG were flying B-17Ds in the process of upgradeing to B-17Es. When war broke out there were only enough B-17Es to fill out the 9th and 22nd Squadrons. So the 11th BS had to be filled out with LB-30s. In fact three LB-30s of the 11th Squadron were the first Bombers of the 7th group to reach Java via the S.America/Africa/India ferry route. If your not going to have the 11th with LB-30s then frankly dont see the need for them to be in the game since as far as I know the 7th BG was the only USAAF unit to fly them on combat missions in the PTO.

I will review this. The need to upgrade to B-25 makes a mid-process update to LB-30 impossible.

There are four Squadrons in CHS with the LB-30 and one more that specifies the LB-30 as an upgrade. Three of these (21, 27, 392) were part of the 30th Bomb Group which was flying primariy A-29 on December 7th (the 392nd had some B-17s and apparently some LB-30). Most of the group was equipped with LB-30 in 1942 (one squadron kept A-29 until upgrading to B-24 in 1943). With no A-29 I made the decision to assign LB-30 to all of the squadrons of the group.

The 435th Bombardment was formed with LB-30 in early 1942 and the 9th Bombardment upgraded from B-17 to LB-30 in 1942.

Don I believe you are mistaken about this. I dont think the Mariposa was carrying P-40s or even at sea on December 7th. Her sister the Lurline was half way to Hawaii on her normal passenger service schedule on the 7th. She quickly turned around for SF upon hearing of the attack. The Coolidge on the otherhand was at sea but off the Solomon Islands along with the USAT Winfield Scott and ecorted by the Louiville. It was returning from the PI after unloading the last major convoy to reach the ilands. Bringing amoung others the 21st and 34th FS, as well as most the personel of the 27th BG and 5th Airbase unit.

You are correct, I am indeed mistaken. I found a reference that gave a December 1st sailing date and missed the year, which was 1942. That's what I get for composing a reply during a commercial break.

*** Correction: the sailing date was not December 1st, it was 12/1 but that is in European format so it's January 12th ***

That's what I get for composing a reply during another commercial break!

[Don Bowen]

There have been a number of posts concerning possible problems with oil and supply distribution. These include:
[ol]
[*] Possible Oil at Middle East
[*] Compensating reductions in oil at Indian and Australian Ports
[*] Changing supply in U.S. bases
[*] Moving supply from ports to inland bases.
[*] Others??
[/ol]

These are not areas of my expertise (nor particular interest) and I do not consider myself capable of such decisions. If anyone would like to provide a complete set of recommendations for such changes, I would be grateful.

Don

[Lemurs!]

What do you mean 'No A29' Don?

Mike

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

What do you mean 'No A29' Don?

Mike

The A-29 is not defined in the CHS database.

[jcjordan]

Don not sure if this is in your ballpark or Andrew's but I noticed on ver3b of the map trying to figure out why I had a TF get stuck in the middle of a no-sail zone, when looking through the readme & in looking at a new game start, Nouema still is a level 6/3 port /AF but the readme says it should start at 3. Is the level 6 correct or the level 3?? If it is supposed to be a level 3, guess I'm gonna have to uninstall CHS then reinstall it (don't know why all this has happening).

[Don Bowen]

Noumea is still a level 6 port as of the CHS Alpha. A change to 3 (3) is on the list for the next release.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

There have been a number of posts concerning possible problems with oil and supply distribution. These include:
[ol]
[*] Possible Oil at Middle East
[*] Compensating reductions in oil at Indian and Australian Ports
[*] Changing supply in U.S. bases
[*] Moving supply from ports to inland bases.
[*] Others??
[/ol]

These are not areas of my expertise (nor particular interest) and I do not consider myself capable of such decisions. If anyone would like to provide a complete set of recommendations for such changes, I would be grateful.

Don

I will spend more time looking at possible base changes later, but for now:

Regarding points 1 and 2. I don't think I would like to see the daily oil at Perth and Melbourne reduced/removed and replaced by more oil in the Middle East. Although the oil sent to Australia DID come from the ME, the map edge makes it potentially more difficult to get the oil to Australia in the game than it was in Real Life. It is easier for Japan to interdict such a supply line.

Regarding moving of supply in the US. Apart from the problem with fuel that has been reported, is there a need to modify the supply sources? Most of the supply is currently generated in the West coast cities, but is this incorrect? I have no idea.

I still haven't provided a list of further base value changes. I will have to get around to doing that...