Jorge's(A) crusade to the fabled kingdom of PresterJohn(J) DBB-C --- Allied AAR

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

May 16th: boring

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Nothing really happened in the last turn; I had an interesting email exchange with PresterJohn; I mentioned that I saw the wolf at the door, but it just left.

this is his answer:
previous experience is anything to go by as soon as the allies spot a few wolves they tend to scatter and run, then make mischief elsewhere. Chasing few lambs tend to use a lot of fuel for little gain and opens opportunities for sheepdogs :) Suprise is everything.

And I have to agree, he was not going to get anything if he kept moving south. surprise is really everything

Some thoughts on this:
- My naval search network worked; however, by travelling in the midpoint between Vaitupu and Ndeni, he managed to remain unspotted for too long, I have decided to move another 12-plane patrol from Xmas island to Luganville; this will close the gap. I will also move another 12-plane patrol from Pearl to Brisbane.

- The carriers need to be in Suva, as this will help me exploit these kind of events, a Midway scenario would be a dream come true.
That said, this is long term. I am not yet happy with the # and quality of planes; particularly fighter and dive bombers. This because I decided to change carrier plane splits; I took out all Devastators and filled the carriers with Marine fighters/ DBs thus I have an asorted mix of inadequate planes, not to mention too many green pilots in the Marine squadrons. Also, I am getting close to the June 42 refit for Lex/ Sara



User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20559
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: May 16th: boring

Post by BBfanboy »

I skip the June 42 refit for Lex/Sara because it actually lowers the total AA value (although the new guns are more effective than the 1.1s) and the radar replacement has less range than the old one (but may be more effective in bad weather). It's a judgement call, but the CVs are badly needed in mid-1942 and the refit takes too long for not much gain, IMO.
I would recommend at least waiting for Wasp/North Carolina TF to get on station before withdrawing Lex and Sara.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: May 16th: boring

Post by witpqs »

BB - Beware the misleading AA value number! That number is produced solely for human consumption and is not used by the combat routines at all.

Prior to the upgrade in question those ships have more weapons that can destroy/disable the aircraft after the aircraft can release their ordnance. Post-upgrade the ships have more weapons that can destroy/disable the aircraft before weapons release.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: May 16th: boring

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

The upgrade is a change of
- 5' guns: 5/25 mk10 to 5/38 mk12
- a little more fuel
- get rid of useless 50cal MGs
- loss of 12 1.1' AA guns
- get a newer/ better radar; I have read comments from Symon that CXAM SS/AS are literaly garbage radars, so might make sense even if they have less range

I still have around 10 days to decide; I am not using my carriers for anything right now, so we will see.
To be honest, I am also afraid of losing by auto-victory if somehow I lost a carrier battle

Image
Attachments
screenshot..15_03_19.jpg
screenshot..15_03_19.jpg (297.64 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20559
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: May 16th: boring

Post by BBfanboy »

Didn't notice the change to 5"/38s - that does make a difference! Thanks for point that out guys!
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

May 18th brought the game's first carrier battle in the war

The Royal Navy's Eastern Fleet engaged light carriers (mini-KB) and battleships (Mutsu) near Andaman.

Before going to the details, lets check the background and the preliminary moves.

On the early 2nd week of May I tried to intercept the Imperial Guards loading into transports at Trincomalee. This was cancelled for several reasons, main ones being: 1) strong LBA presence at Ceylon. 2) His use of "fast transport" destroyers, not the best of targets for TB
3) Fuel levels low. Thus I decided to postpone and move to Diego Garcia to refuel

On May 14th the refueling TFs spot and sunk a submarine (I-158) lurking at the base looking for easy prey. This was a confirmed kill, with multiple DC attacks, ending on a surface engagement in which light cruisers, destroyers used guns to put it out of its misery.
This was great news, but of course this hinted him there was something brewing. The TF composition was obviously not ASW patrols.

Having things on perspective, I should had withdrawn, as surprise was obviously lost. Nevertheless, I decided to try another foray into the Indian Ocean for the following reasons:
- I knew KB was not there, at most I would meet mini-KB
- Better yet, there was always a chance to get a long range attack to a BB/ cruiser TF if mini-KB didn't appear.
- The path chosen was in the limits of naval search/ naval attack from Ceylon.
- Most if not all the ships involved are scheduled to withdraw, so even at the worst case scenario, the loss would be only on victory points.
- Last but not least, BOREDOM... [>:] we were having very boring turns lately [8|] and although I know this is not excuse, I was eager to try some little raiding.

The plan was to use the cruisers as bait, and send whatever he reacts with to the waiting CVs/ BBs. Things didn't work as expected, but results were not that bad [;)]

This is the fleet position before the battle:

Image
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (262.83 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

And a rather messy picture of the carrier TF composition and orders..

- I was wondering why the Martlets didn't fly escort and instead decided to protect the TF... Answer: I changed them to 100% CAP 0 range when they arrived to Diego Garcia.. And I forgot to change them back to "escort" [X(][X(][&:]
Albacore pilots not amused

Image
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (266.43 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
apbarog
Posts: 3821
Joined: Thu May 23, 2002 6:54 am

RE: Naval Patrols

Post by apbarog »

sorry mis-posting
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

The 1st day of the battle of Andaman Sea, and YES, I expect additional action tomorrow.

AM Phase: Naval Search detected enemy
- The battle started in the AM phase with float planes finding enemy carriers. This while recon flights also were detected over my TFs.
RN Carriers reacted, but there were no strikes.

PM Phase: Japanese attack:
- Once again, naval search detected enemy carriers, while bombers and recon flew over TF. RN reacted but 22 Albacores lost cohesion.
- Then the incoming Japanese strike: a perfectly coordinated formation of 12 B5N1s, 12 B5N2s and 27 A6M2s was intercepted by 15 Sea Hurricanes 1B and 15 Martlets II

CAP results:
- 7 Zeros destroyed, plus 3 very likely operational losses ("spin away on fire" message)
- 4 Kates destroyed (2 B5N1, 2 B5N2)

AA results:
- 8 Kates destroyed, 11 damaged
- All torpedoes missed, zero damage to the fleet!!!!!

Image

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Car Nicobar at 35,61

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 75 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 32 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 27
B5N1 Kate x 12
B5N2 Kate x 12

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 15
Martlet II x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
B5N1 Kate: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged
B5N1 Kate: 2 destroyed by flak
B5N2 Kate: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 2 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
Martlet II: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CV Formidable
CLAA Van Heemskerck

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x B5N1 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
8 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

CAP engaged:
No.880 Sqn FAA with Sea Hurricane Ib (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 11000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 22 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
No.888 Sqn FAA with Martlet II (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 15 minutes
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (248.53 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20559
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by BBfanboy »

Great Result! It appears that setting the Martlets at 100% CAP wasn't a mistake - you were just unconsciously prescient! [:D]
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

PM Phase: British attacks:
As mentioned before, of the approximately 45 Albacores that launch, 22 lost cohesion. This was actually good news, as they put off balance the Japanese CAP defense:

1st strike:
- 23 Albacores attacked, 13 survived CAP
- They scored one torpedo hit at CVL Shoho, fuel storage explosion. [:D]

2nd strike:
- 8 Albacores attacked, CAP was out of position, all passed
- They scored one torpedo hit at BB Mutsu, no visible damage

3d strike:
- 14 Albacores attacked, 8 survived CAP
- Another torpedo hit for BB Mutsu, no visible damage

Image


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Little Andaman at 38,60

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 27

Allied aircraft
Albacore I x 23

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Albacore I: 4 destroyed, 13 damaged
Albacore I: 2 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
CVL Shoho, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CVE Hosho
CVL Zuiho

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Albacore I launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Mk XII Torpedo
8 x Albacore I launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Mk XII Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 9000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 4 minutes
Zuiho-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 3 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 20000 and 29070.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes

Fuel storage explosion on CVL Shoho


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Little Andaman at 38,60

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 12 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 21

Allied aircraft
Albacore I x 8

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Albacore I: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu, Torpedo hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Albacore I launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Mk XII Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 5000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 34 minutes
Zuiho-1 with A6M2 Zero (6 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 54 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Little Andaman at 38,60

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 34 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 20 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 19

Allied aircraft
Albacore I x 14

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Albacore I: 3 destroyed, 4 damaged
Albacore I: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu, Torpedo hits 1
CVL Zuiho

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Albacore I launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Mk XII Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 0 on standby, 1 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 1 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes
Zuiho-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 3 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes
Hosho-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 3 on standby, 1 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 9000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 23 minutes
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (227.54 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Summary of the 1st day of battle:

Japan:
- CVL Shoho damaged, likely on fire and out of action. Air losses report hints it didn't sink
- BB Mutsu damaged, likely with heavy float damage. It will limp slowly to Singapore for repairs
- Zeros: 10 to 11 loses
- Kates: I estimated 14 losses, game says 16

Allies:
- No ship losses

Albacores:
19 destroyed, 8 damaged, 22 available, enough torpedos for tomorrow
pilots: 8 KIA, 2 WIA, 6 MIA

Martlets:
4 destroyed, 8 damaged, 4 available + 16 more on CVL Hermes, this carrier was covering the BBs; but it will now steam at full speed to join the carrier force
pilots: 1 KIA

Sea Hurricanes:
3 damaged, 12 available
pilots: no losses

Image


But a more important question is what is available for tomorrow?

For the Allies it is very easy: 22 Albacores, 12 Sea Hurricanes and 20 Martlets once Hermes joins
This is good enough for a second day strike force.

For Japan it is a lot more complex, as we will need assumptions:
1st: carriers available are those already engaged = CVL Shoho, Zuiho, CVE Hosho
This gives 30 + 30 + 20 airplanes = 80 planes
However, I was attacked by 27 Zeroes, and another 27 were on CAP, which gives a total of 54 Zeroes; the discrepancy might be simply less Kates or maybe he is carrying above limit.

2nd: Fighter/ Bomber split is:
Shoho = 20 Zeroes, 12 Kates
Zuiho = 20 Zeroes, 12 Kates
Hosho = 14 Zeroes, 6 Kates
This gives a full totals of 54 fighters, 30 bombers before losses
Tomorrow, he should have hypothetically available 44 Zeroes plus no more than 16 bombers, likely less, maybe around 10 as some of his damaged planes will be unavailable.

3rd: CVL Shoho is out of action, thus the total of bombers will be even less. maybe 6 to 8 Kates


In conclusion, Tomorrow's battle looks promising. While his strike force will be seriously diminished, mine is powerful enough to get additional hits, hopefully to the cripples.
That said, I am expecting another Albacore massacre as there are more than enough Zeroes. This time I will escort the Albacores.

Another point to make, there is a very good chance of gun action between SCTF; I hope that for once, I have some luck on the surface combat.
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (35.31 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20559
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by BBfanboy »

Are the Albacores as tough as the Swordfish at surviving damage? How many of the damaged ones were lost?
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I started with 49 Albacores; all ready

45 attacked, 4 did naval search

16 didn't penetrate CAP; of these 13 were destroyed, 3 damaged

29 reached the fleet, 5 were destroyed by flak, 1 to OP losses


26 in total came back, plus 4 doing naval search = 30 total planes now; of these 8 are damaged.

Se we can say that of 29 attacking planes, 14 were hit; 5 of which were destroyed by flak, 1 a write off, and 8 required repair time
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by witpqs »

With no fighter escorts I call that pretty tough!
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

With no fighter escorts I call that pretty tough!

There was luck involved of course [:'(], but also it is important to mention this is not the real Kido Butai; my opponent have had carrier plane losses since day one; thus I bet this is team "B" or "C" at most

EDIT: you can see on 3 threads above that the total A6M2 (FOW) losses are 316 planes, 200 to Air-to-Air, those usually over Allied territory

EDIT #2: Also check the altitude GAP. Zeros were at 20,000 feet, Albacores came lower at 6,000
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I expect blood tomorrow [;)]

Hopefully less British and more Japanese blood

Image
Attachments
20150323..1.23x10.jpg
20150323..1.23x10.jpg (231.84 KiB) Viewed 161 times
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Are the Albacores as tough as the Swordfish at surviving damage? How many of the damaged ones were lost?

Actually they look better


Image
Attachments
20150323..01SCMII.jpg
20150323..01SCMII.jpg (75.58 KiB) Viewed 161 times
Alikchi2
Posts: 1786
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 9:29 pm
Contact:

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Alikchi2 »

Fantastic work. Love to see the RN getting some.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Carrier battle of Andaman Sea

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

thanks!!

Was this just good luck for the Allies?

although obviously good rolls did help, it is important to mention some facts:

- 45 Albacores attacked vs. only 24 Kates. Bigger numbers always help
- 30 Allied fighters on CAP vs. 27 for the Japanese.
- 27 Japanese escorts, while no British escorts at all. But this was mitigated by an altitude GAP. While the Allied CAP was at the same relative height than the Japanese raid, the Japanese CAP was completely off at 20,000 feet. The raid came much lower at 6,000 feet and then dropped to sea level for torpedo attack
- Allied AA was significantly stronger than Japanese, just compare:
* Formidable's 16 DPs guns, 48 pom-poms and 10 Oerlikons 20mm vs. Shoho's 8 DP guns and 12 Hotchkiss 25mm
* Van Hermerskerck's 10 DP guns, 4 pom-poms, 6 Oerlikons 20mm vs. Mutsu's 8 DP guns and 20 Hotchkiss 25mm

Also if we are talking about luck; something I didn't mention was that I got 2 additional hits to BB Mutsu, but those were "hit, no explosion". With better luck BB Mutsu would be already sunk

Looking forward to next turn
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”