Hi, These are WITP results not UV. The B-17 groups do not exist in this size or type of aircraft on 05.01.42 I used the editor. The purpose is to conduct tests using various Japanese fighters.
(The KAIc was placed before I realized it is a night fighter and does not fly CAP during the day. I'm going to run a night bombing mission for it.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 36 (exp as is but I raised morale to 99)(mid to high 80's exp)
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 102 (exp low but morale 99)
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 5 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 1 destroyed
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 1 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 26 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
Men lost 10
Airbase hits 19
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 85
Attacking Level Bombers:
14 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
8 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lunga has no AA defense. All B-17 loses will be from enemy fighters.
Results
1 zero lost (The Nick does not count it was not engaged)
4 B-17E lost (1 shot down 3 while returning)
more to follow.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 51 (2x36ac 75exp 99 morale)
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 105 (3x36ac 2x64 exp 1x45 exp all 99 morale)
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 4 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 38 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
Men lost 10
Airbase hits 30
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 91
Attacking Level Bombers:
18 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
17 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
results no Tony lost
5xB-17 lost in air to air
1 lost operations
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/02/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 40
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 51
no losses
no losses
Airbase hits 12
Runway hits 34
Attacking Level Bombers:
10 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
14 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
night combat needs work. no loses
Questions regarding Production
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
WITP Testing
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Results appear as i would have expected given past experiences
I'd say (again) that the "problem" is not in the loss column where it comes to B-17's but in the lack-a-daisy impact of disruption on their bombing runs. Even with 38+ hits on the bomber groups, nothing seems to prevent that pinpoint accuracy. (Not counting the morale break rule of course.)
Almost reminds me of that math(Random) problem revealed in USAAF where only the first 2-3 BG's of any given raid were ever "selected" as an attacking JG/KG's target. (the BG's determined by their computer ID) Those first several BG's suffered terrible disruption and losses but left the other BG's unaffected save by flak allowing for far better bombing results on a consistant basis. On the next turn you could examine your BG's and sure enough, the first couple to several BG's would look like swiss cheese but the other BG's all would be in good shape in terms of numbers and morale.
I wonder if what were seeing here and in UV is multiple "hits" being expended on only a very small # of the "bombers" leaving the rest free of non-flak caused disruption. The 17's DUR rating is certainly high enough to absorb numerous hits
I'd say (again) that the "problem" is not in the loss column where it comes to B-17's but in the lack-a-daisy impact of disruption on their bombing runs. Even with 38+ hits on the bomber groups, nothing seems to prevent that pinpoint accuracy. (Not counting the morale break rule of course.)
Almost reminds me of that math(Random) problem revealed in USAAF where only the first 2-3 BG's of any given raid were ever "selected" as an attacking JG/KG's target. (the BG's determined by their computer ID) Those first several BG's suffered terrible disruption and losses but left the other BG's unaffected save by flak allowing for far better bombing results on a consistant basis. On the next turn you could examine your BG's and sure enough, the first couple to several BG's would look like swiss cheese but the other BG's all would be in good shape in terms of numbers and morale.
I wonder if what were seeing here and in UV is multiple "hits" being expended on only a very small # of the "bombers" leaving the rest free of non-flak caused disruption. The 17's DUR rating is certainly high enough to absorb numerous hits
Hits
Hi, Remember 38 aircraft damaged does not mean 38 different aircarft hit only that the fighters claim to have hit B-17's 38 times.
In fact the 38 hits could be what caused the 5 air combat loses.
The question from an operantional point of view is what would normally be the result of 2 groups of 36 Tony versus 3 groups of 36 B-17 in clear weather, with all aircraft morale of 99 and under 20 fatigue. Would the fighters turn back the bombers. How many 100 plane strikes did the Luftwaffe abort? How many did the Japanese abort? What was the average result of 100 B-17 attacks on airfields? (German or Japanese)
In fact the 38 hits could be what caused the 5 air combat loses.
The question from an operantional point of view is what would normally be the result of 2 groups of 36 Tony versus 3 groups of 36 B-17 in clear weather, with all aircraft morale of 99 and under 20 fatigue. Would the fighters turn back the bombers. How many 100 plane strikes did the Luftwaffe abort? How many did the Japanese abort? What was the average result of 100 B-17 attacks on airfields? (German or Japanese)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Right. I wasn't assuming that the 38 hits were on 38 different B-17's, but i was wondering if the math that governs "which" B-17's are being hit might be consistantly assigning those "hits" to a very small number of "bombers", based on the sequencial integer assigned to it or from however other method the code uses to distinquish indiv weapons systems.
Moot in a way i suppose. In general the game treats base hexes as a very small virtual area allowing bombers with generous loadouts (like the B-17) to litterally saturate a base with hits.....from anchored ships to port installations to airfields, all at once. Remember that AAR i posted circa 1945 where the US has available very large numbers of heavy bombers?
Sticking to your test though, let me suggest this, re run your 100 plane bombing run and this time ground the fighters. Lets see if there's any substantial (if any) difference in the hit scores for the bombers. That might give us some answers regarding the effects of disruption.
Moot in a way i suppose. In general the game treats base hexes as a very small virtual area allowing bombers with generous loadouts (like the B-17) to litterally saturate a base with hits.....from anchored ships to port installations to airfields, all at once. Remember that AAR i posted circa 1945 where the US has available very large numbers of heavy bombers?
Sticking to your test though, let me suggest this, re run your 100 plane bombing run and this time ground the fighters. Lets see if there's any substantial (if any) difference in the hit scores for the bombers. That might give us some answers regarding the effects of disruption.
results
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 104
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 1 destroyed
Airbase hits 29
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 114
Attacking Level Bombers:
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
19 2 85 hits versus the Zeros
30 1 91 versus the Tony
29 2 114 versus undefended
So the fighters are having an effect.
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 104
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 1 destroyed
Airbase hits 29
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 114
Attacking Level Bombers:
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
19 2 85 hits versus the Zeros
30 1 91 versus the Tony
29 2 114 versus undefended
So the fighters are having an effect.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Re: results
Originally posted by Mogami
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 104
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 1 destroyed
Airbase hits 29
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 114
Attacking Level Bombers:
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
19 2 85 hits versus the Zeros
30 1 91 versus the Tony
29 2 114 versus undefended
So the fighters are having an effect.
However if the production of B-17 is so high that a loss of 5
is simply shrugged off....it dont mean a thing.
“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
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Re: results
Originally posted by Mogami
[
19 2 85 hits versus the Zeros
30 1 91 versus the Tony
29 2 114 versus undefended
So the fighters are having an effect. [/B]
not very much of one though. Kinda as i figured. I would suggest (since i'm at work :p ) that you run it a few more times both ways, with fighters defending, with fighters grounded but i suspect the results will be more of the same.
Re: Re: results
Originally posted by Nikademus
not very much of one though. Kinda as i figured. I would suggest (since i'm at work :p ) that you run it a few more times both ways, with fighters defending, with fighters grounded but i suspect the results will be more of the same.
Not very much??? 114 compared to 85 and 91 (the difference is equal to the unopposed night attack by 50 bombers.)
The fighters made a 20 percent reduction in hits. Check this result out.
85 (25.4 percent less)
91 (20.1 percent less)
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 48
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 102
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 14 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 26 damaged
Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 73 (27.8 percent less then unopposed)
The Oscar II's seemed to have a large impact on accuracy while causing the least amount of damage ( 2 Osacar II and 1 B-17 LOST)
All tests are 2 Japanese fighter groups of 36 AC each (72) versus 3 B-17 groups of 36 AC each (108). The fighter groups are set to 90 percent CAP. (I don't know why the numbers differ from turn to turn)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97 (unopposed)
Japanese aircraft
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 102
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 68
Attacking Level Bombers:
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
8 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
How much are the different hits worth? (Is one airbase hit the same as 1 runway hit?)
How many hits would 100 percent hits be?
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
perhaps i should rephrase that to say "not much of an impact" at least when combined with the issue of high level consistancy in terms of hits scored on the base. 91 hits or 114......wont mean much difference on the ground unless you've got 10 seebee units stacked on the base hex.
It looks like the engine has little room for more variable results when raids are heavily contested, giving players instead a gentle statistical curb based on the # of hits scored on the bombers. It would be nice if a large and experienced counter-attack could more greatly break up/disrupt raids resulting in large % of missed or waylaid bombing runs.
Granted, these tests are bereft of the morale failure rule which would reduce the # of bombers, but with high DUR units it takes alot of hits and/or a ridiculous amount of defending fighters to produce that even in the absence of escorts.
thanks for taking the time to accomidate my curiosity. Think i'll run a few tests myself to test this variability.
It looks like the engine has little room for more variable results when raids are heavily contested, giving players instead a gentle statistical curb based on the # of hits scored on the bombers. It would be nice if a large and experienced counter-attack could more greatly break up/disrupt raids resulting in large % of missed or waylaid bombing runs.
Granted, these tests are bereft of the morale failure rule which would reduce the # of bombers, but with high DUR units it takes alot of hits and/or a ridiculous amount of defending fighters to produce that even in the absence of escorts.
thanks for taking the time to accomidate my curiosity. Think i'll run a few tests myself to test this variability.
Impact
Originally posted by Nikademus
perhaps i should rephrase that to say "not much of an impact" at least when combined with the issue of high level consistancy in terms of hits scored on the base. 91 hits or 114......wont mean much difference on the ground unless you've got 10 seebee units stacked on the base hex.
It looks like the engine has little room for more variable results when raids are heavily contested, giving players instead a gentle statistical curb based on the # of hits scored on the bombers. It would be nice if a large and experienced counter-attack could more greatly break up/disrupt raids resulting in large % of missed or waylaid bombing runs.
Granted, these tests are bereft of the morale failure rule which would reduce the # of bombers, but with high DUR units it takes alot of hits and/or a ridiculous amount of defending fighters to produce that even in the absence of escorts.
thanks for taking the time to accomidate my curiosity. Think i'll run a few tests myself to test this variability.
Hi, the difference is enough that the US player would have to make 4 attacks versus fighters to match what 3 attacks unopposed could do. (Making it worth while to defend the base.
Hoping for weather to abort a mission or two. It's not pretty for the Japanese but it does show the fighters have a postive impact. I don't believe the Japanese ever turned back 100 B-17's with fighters. As for producing them (by altering the production)
I think people will be surprised and dismayed by the results of trying to build nothing but B-17. The medium bombers still play a vital role in the conduct of the war.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Yes indeed, but thats a whole different kettle of fish (the medium bombers) They are and have been the problem all along much more so than B-17's and 24's which attract so much attention. I agree, stopping a 100 plane raid of these big bombers would be very difficult though i think the answer there lies largely not in the air to air results but with the other issue i've been mentioning. I'd still like to see a potential greater impact on those unescorted raids in terms of disruption effects. If the bombers have even better exp, the impact on their acc might be that much less again raising the question, what point escorts?
The medium bombers being able to act like heavies though.....thats more serious. heh , perhaps players will decide only to focus on medium bombers....we can call the scenerio, "Mitchell's dream"
The medium bombers being able to act like heavies though.....thats more serious. heh , perhaps players will decide only to focus on medium bombers....we can call the scenerio, "Mitchell's dream"
rats
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
J7W Shinden x 42
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
J7W Shinden x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 1 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 8 damaged
Airbase hits 28
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 122
Attacking Level Bombers:
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
2 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yikes, maybe they do better against fighters. I thought they would slaughter the bombers.
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
J7W Shinden x 42
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
J7W Shinden x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 1 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 8 damaged
Airbase hits 28
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 122
Attacking Level Bombers:
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
2 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yikes, maybe they do better against fighters. I thought they would slaughter the bombers.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
George
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 48
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 104
Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George x 1 destroyed
N1K1-J George x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 6 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 20 damaged
PO2 M.Inano of 144th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 22
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 80
Attacking Level Bombers:
25 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
10 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
The George by far so far
The 1 George was destroyed on the ground 9 B-17's were lost via air to air (0 op)(AC that crash on way back due to damage from air combatare listed as air to air. AC that crash because of weather or mishap or AA are Op)
The are 3 B-17 groups 1 lost 5 B-17 (morale down to 55) another lost 4 (morale down to 72) The third group lost 0 (3 damaged)(morale 84)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 48
Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 106
Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell x 8 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell x 11 damaged
PO2 A.Ohara of 144th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 65
Attacking Level Bombers:
26 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
19 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
15 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
4 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
15 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
1 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm medium bombers do achive heavy bomber results.
9 lost air to air 1 lost OP (no Japanese AC lost)
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 48
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 104
Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George x 1 destroyed
N1K1-J George x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 6 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 20 damaged
PO2 M.Inano of 144th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 22
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 80
Attacking Level Bombers:
25 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
10 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress at 9000 feet
The George by far so far
The 1 George was destroyed on the ground 9 B-17's were lost via air to air (0 op)(AC that crash on way back due to damage from air combatare listed as air to air. AC that crash because of weather or mishap or AA are Op)
The are 3 B-17 groups 1 lost 5 B-17 (morale down to 55) another lost 4 (morale down to 72) The third group lost 0 (3 damaged)(morale 84)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 48
Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 106
Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell x 8 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell x 11 damaged
PO2 A.Ohara of 144th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 65
Attacking Level Bombers:
26 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
19 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
15 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
4 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
15 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
1 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm medium bombers do achive heavy bomber results.
9 lost air to air 1 lost OP (no Japanese AC lost)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
ratio
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 66
Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George x 8 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell x 27 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell x 15 damaged
PO2 H.Kawakubo of 5th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 4
Airbase hits 20
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 79
Attacking Level Bombers:
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
12 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
14 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
7 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow I added 1 more group of fighters.
23 bombers shot down 0 Op lost no fighters lost. Prehaps there is a threshold as far as ratio that has to be achived to produce good results. (23 out of 108 is pretty good from a Japanese point of view)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 96
Allied aircraft
B-17C Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude x 5 destroyed
A5M4 Claude x 23 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17C Fortress x 7 damaged
FO J.Kramer of 5th BG is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 52
Attacking Level Bombers:
27 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it's not just numbers
4 Claude shot down 1 OP
1 B-17 OP (But that's not the best bombing result so far)
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 66
Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George x 8 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell x 27 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell x 15 damaged
PO2 H.Kawakubo of 5th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 4
Airbase hits 20
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 79
Attacking Level Bombers:
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
12 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
14 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
7 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow I added 1 more group of fighters.
23 bombers shot down 0 Op lost no fighters lost. Prehaps there is a threshold as far as ratio that has to be achived to produce good results. (23 out of 108 is pretty good from a Japanese point of view)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 96
Allied aircraft
B-17C Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude x 5 destroyed
A5M4 Claude x 23 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17C Fortress x 7 damaged
FO J.Kramer of 5th BG is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 52
Attacking Level Bombers:
27 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it's not just numbers
4 Claude shot down 1 OP
1 B-17 OP (But that's not the best bombing result so far)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Re: ratio
Originally posted by Mogami
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 66
Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George x 8 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell x 27 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell x 15 damaged
PO2 H.Kawakubo of 5th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 4
Airbase hits 20
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 79
Attacking Level Bombers:
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
12 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
14 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
5 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
7 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
6 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
9 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
2 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
3 x B-25C Mitchell at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow I added 1 more group of fighters.
23 bombers shot down 0 Op lost no fighters lost. Prehaps there is a threshold as far as ratio that has to be achived to produce good results. (23 out of 108 is pretty good from a Japanese point of view)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 96
Allied aircraft
B-17C Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude x 5 destroyed
A5M4 Claude x 23 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17C Fortress x 7 damaged
FO J.Kramer of 5th BG is credited with kill number 2
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 52
Attacking Level Bombers:
27 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
9 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
5 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it's not just numbers
4 Claude shot down 1 OP
1 B-17 OP (But that's not the best bombing result so far)
This is news =) What exactly are we calling a 'George'
The 'George' I am familiar with was not introduced in any numbers until 1944.
“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
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
test
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 96
Allied aircraft
B-17C Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 1 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 23 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17C Fortress x 2 destroyed
B-17C Fortress x 25 damaged
Airbase hits 18
Runway hits 73
Attacking Level Bombers:
26 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 zero air to air 2 OP (there are 8 damaged)
3 B-17 air to air 0 OP (ready ac group 1 20, gp2 22 gp 3 21)
Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 96
Allied aircraft
B-17C Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 1 destroyed
A6M2 Zero x 23 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17C Fortress x 2 destroyed
B-17C Fortress x 25 damaged
Airbase hits 18
Runway hits 73
Attacking Level Bombers:
26 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
15 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
20 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
11 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
6 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
4 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
3 x B-17C Fortress at 9000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 zero air to air 2 OP (there are 8 damaged)
3 B-17 air to air 0 OP (ready ac group 1 20, gp2 22 gp 3 21)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Shindens
Originally posted by Aussie
This is news =) What exactly are we calling a 'George'
Good question - the N1k1-J prototype first flew in Dec 42. Maybe put those Shidens up against the B-17s instead of the Claudes and see how much better they do.
Hi If you go back to the begining of the test and start there you'll see the Shindens did lousey.
Prehaps it's an altitude thing?
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Re: rats
Originally posted by Mogami
Japanese aircraft
J7W Shinden x 42
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 105
Japanese aircraft losses
J7W Shinden x 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress x 1 destroyed
B-17E Fortress x 8 damaged
Airbase hits 28
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 122
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yikes, maybe they do better against fighters. I thought they would slaughter the bombers.
The Shinden was specifically designed to be a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor and go after the B-29s. I would expect it to do the best of all the Japanese planes against unescorted bombers. Those results are down right depressing. Hopefully more tweaking will be done.
Yamamoto