The PERFECT WAR Mod: Allied Side

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

ORIGINAL: RevRick

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

RevRick what would be the difference with a supercharged P-39 over the regular one

A whole lot! The plane was entirely different with the supercharger. From what I have read, it would probably approach the performance of the P-63 in the game. Higher speed, higher ceiling, greater capacity, probably would have been still quite short legged, but still....

When I lost my hard drive about five months ago, I had the data for the website. I could probably still find it, but it would have made the early war a little more difficult for the IJN flyers.

I thought I read somewhere that a supercharged P-39 was very similar to the P-51, except the range. Of course, everything I've ever read is true.

Or was it that the P-51 with the prototype engine was similar to the P-39? It's been so long....

I remember, somewhere, somewhen, reading your first statement above, or something very similar. Trouble is that I have no idea now where I read it. I have postulated in a mod that the Bell company tried to save their collective tookuses by building the P-400 with a supercharger, but only in limited quantities. The Army starts to take a look at it as a result of the failure of the P-40 to be effective in the Battle of Britain, and winds up with a relatively small number at the start of the war. I think it was General Electric building the superchargers, and their plant capacity was too small to include it in a lot of aircraft with the Allison engines.

I recollect the raw date for the XP 39, the pre-castration version, hitting very near 400 mph in the roughly 1939 time period. But some half-wit in the department for ordering aircraft for the AAC decided that they needed to be more of a ground support craft, and took out the supercharger for that purpose. I guess they weren't watching what has happening in Europe.

[Terminus]

I really hope JWE's post doesn't get implemented. Suspect that would be the micromanagement straw that breaks the camel's back.

Can you imagine what happens if all tenders of one nationality get sunk? Or how about just changing the nationalities of bases by paying PPs? It's a BAD idea.

Oh, and tenders did service ships of different nationalities. The Dutch Zuiderkruis, for example, serviced RN ships at Trincomalee for two years.

[JWE]

Not to worry, Termie. We have some nifty Fleet Train rules, but there's no way to make them default to stock. So no way they will show up in a beta.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: RevRick
I remember, somewhere, somewhen, reading your first statement above, or something very similar. Trouble is that I have no idea now where I read it. I have postulated in a mod that the Bell company tried to save their collective tookuses by building the P-400 with a supercharger, but only in limited quantities. The Army starts to take a look at it as a result of the failure of the P-40 to be effective in the Battle of Britain, and winds up with a relatively small number at the start of the war. I think it was General Electric building the superchargers, and their plant capacity was too small to include it in a lot of aircraft with the Allison engines.

Yeah, the lack of available superchargers led to the decision to build the P-39's without them. But it also makes me wonder. If the US (with more than 10 times the manufacturing base of Japan) had shortages of such key components, maybe our friends in the other thread should take a closer look at the massive expansion they are planning. The US was able to correct this shortage simply by co-opting civilian manufacturers when war arrived---but the Japanese had virtually no civilian manufacturing to co-opt.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Not to worry, Termie. We have some nifty Fleet Train rules, but there's no way to make them default to stock. So no way they will show up in a beta.

Good. This is definitely House Rules Territory (tm).

Anyway, back to the mod.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Not to worry, Termie. We have some nifty Fleet Train rules, but there's no way to make them default to stock. So no way they will show up in a beta.

While I am a staunch opponent of further micro-management implementations in a game already full of them....I have to admit I like the idea of there being a stricter re-arming rule based on Nationality. It would help improve the representation of the SRA situation as well as early SoPac.

Now if one could only fix all those little airfield "company" units. aiee.

[DOCUP]

Alot of interesting thoughts.  I like the logistics of the game but dang making it so ships can only rearm in national ports would be a pain in the arse.  So what all has been agreed upon for the Allies?


edit: Was just thinking that if AC is added to PI and Singers, won't you need to add aviation support also.

doc

[John 3rd]

The units could be slightly more filled out at start so one has enough BF Support.

[Herrbear]

Since you are looking at redeploying units. What about the two Canadian Bn being deployed to Malaya instead of Singapore?

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
The units could be slightly more filled out at start so one has enough BF Support.

Well, it is your mod, and you may do as you please. But I would counsel against doing that.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Yeah, the lack of available superchargers led to the decision to build the P-39's without them.

Not disputing this statement, as it is accurate in that there were not enough superchargers for all of the fighters that the Army wanted to build. However, it is also a fact that there was a lot of politics surrounding the P-39. My opinion, is that it was political decision within the DoD whereby the P-39 did not get supercharged. Just my opinion though ...

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Yeah, the lack of available superchargers led to the decision to build the P-39's without them.

Not disputing this statement, as it is accurate in that there were not enough superchargers for all of the fighters that the Army wanted to build. However, it is also a fact that there was a lot of politics surrounding the P-39. My opinion, is that it was political decision within the DoD whereby the P-39 did not get supercharged. Just my opinion though ...

As the P-39 was orriginally ordered as a high-altitude interceptor it's hard to see what "politics" could have been involved in deciding not to supercharge the engine. Do you know of something specific?

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

Since you are looking at redeploying units. What about the two Canadian Bn being deployed to Malaya instead of Singapore?

Do you mean Hong Kong?

That raised a thought. HK might actually be useful for while pending on where we start China action with the IJA.

[DanielAnsell]

This mod looks very interesting. As a dedicated AFB, who unfortunately hasn't ever been able to sustain PBEM play, so plays against the AI, I'd like to talk more about the torpedo issue.

I know it was mentioned before, and it seems like an article of faith that it isn't possible to give the USN reliable modern (for the time) torpedoes, and still have a viable game.

I read this http://www.historynet.com/us-torpedo-tr ... war-ii.htm article, and while having only one source, and that just an internet piece, is crappy scholarship the article seemed fairly well researched and written.

If it is accurate, the USN's torpedo woes came from a perfect storm of bureaucratic idiocy, plain bad luck, poor design choices, and almost unbelievable failures of communication on many levels, the whole thing being too crazy to be believable as fiction, but nonetheless true.

All it would have taken is one calibration device that was properly aligned, or one naval officer who talked to the British about their torpedo experiences in 1939 - 1941, or a few dozen of the torpedoes tested at a secure location in the late 1930s using common sense methods, and the USN would have had modern torpedoes as reliable as anybody's in December of 1942.

Clearly, it would have made a big difference in the war, and it would make a huge difference in the game.

So, with all that in mind, given perfect freedom to make any changes I saw fit, I'd do the following.

1) Effectively set the scenario to play with US dud torpedos as off.

2) In addition to having more destroyers and escort ships at game start, as part of their fleet improvements, allow for comprehensive upgrades to improve Japanese ASW ratings on relevant platforms over the course of the war, since they'd have a much more dangerous and robust submarine threat to react to. These upgrades should get most Japanese ASW platforms to ASW rating 6, at the least, by January 1st, 1944.

3) Either mandated, or optional, diversion of Japanese industry to building/accelerating additional escort/destroyer vessels.

[kfsgo]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That raised a thought. HK might actually be useful for while pending on where we start China action with the IJA.

You seem to be getting on with the 'naval architecht' side of things; do you have a concrete geopolitical outlook for (let's say) 1930, 1933, 1936 and 1939, as regards what's changed vs. our boring old reality? I get the impression the Japanese are spending a bunch more money on the navy; has there been a global or regional economic change to enable that, are they just transferring money around, or is it being handwaved away? I don't mean that perjuratively - I guess what I'm getting at is that it'd nice to have a summary of what's gone on and a 'story so far' for Japan so as to start getting something concrete together for their likely oppos. Is there one that I've missed?

[John 3rd]

We are getting serious progress down with the naval side and a BUNCH of ideas have been floated regarding the Alt History. Most important is starting China in 1939 allowing for my investment within the economy (Manchuria/Korea) for those years.

The Fleet is increased but not by much. Roughly same number of CVs (but better size), a few additional BB, however, there is a reduction in cruisers and DDs see only slight growth in their numbers at start.

As to the TT Question, I am more then happy to do some changing here. Just got past the 'fixes' to the issue in Silent Victory. AMAZING! If possible I would like to improve TT performance in August 1942 (instead of Jan 43) and then again in Jan 43. Should be a good, historical change.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
As to the TT Question, I am more then happy to do some changing here. Just got past the 'fixes' to the issue in Silent Victory. AMAZING! If possible I would like to improve TT performance in August 1942 (instead of Jan 43) and then again in Jan 43. Should be a good, historical change.

No can do, my friend. Hard wired, with dates. And dud rate is hard wired by date, too. Been that way since WiTP.

Only way you can tweak it is with a series of torpedoes in the Device file, with different availability dates and dud rates. Then change all the subs in the Class file to get the different torpedoes as upgrades. Sorry 'bout that, but thought I would save you doing a lot of tweaking and testing for nothing.

Ciao, John

[DanielAnsell]

It's not that hard to conceive, I think, of the USN having fully functional torpedoes by Dec 7, 1941. Rather than go through all the work of trying to set up new torpedo devices, why not just design the mod to be played with the USN torpedo dud switch set to off, and adjust Japanese upgrades and platforms with that assumption in mind?

If I recall correctly, doesn't turning that switch off set the dud rate to the same as everybody else's?

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
As to the TT Question, I am more then happy to do some changing here. Just got past the 'fixes' to the issue in Silent Victory. AMAZING! If possible I would like to improve TT performance in August 1942 (instead of Jan 43) and then again in Jan 43. Should be a good, historical change.

No can do, my friend. Hard wired, with dates. And dud rate is hard wired by date, too. Been that way since WiTP.

Only way you can tweak it is with a series of torpedoes in the Device file, with different availability dates and dud rates. Then change all the subs in the Class file to get the different torpedoes as upgrades. Sorry 'bout that, but thought I would save you doing a lot of tweaking and testing for nothing.

Ciao, John

Thanks for the head's up John.

I might be willing to try this idea. The SS snafu is so integral to the story that I really don't want to give them full operational ability on Dec 7th.

Sorry about that Carny.

[ny59giants]

One class of at start subs can get different torpedoes that are like the S-boats and have working torpedoes, have them change to another type that doesn't have a dud rate with 4/42 upgrades, or have a later in 42 upgrade that changes torpedoes. Simple solution.