Page 5 of 7
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:53 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: m10bob
1.I am using CHS and have in 1/1944 captured most of northen Japan.
Shikka now has a Russian I 16mod24 squadron, which is assigned to the "Far East Command".(I never got any messages indicating it was coming.)
By the time it showed up, I already had been there a couple of months and I have American and Canadian units there.
The Soviets are not active..
I had taken this city from Japanese forces.
I use Andrews' ext map mod.
2.One of my American replacement units a few months ago was the 56th fighter group.
IIRC, this was Hub Zemke's famous unit, part of the 8th A.F., in ETO..
Please correct me if I am wrong?
The 56th Operated out of California in May-June, 1942, then from Nome and later Anchorage for the rest of 1942. See answer above.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:33 pm
by timtom
Hi Don,
Could I possibly ask you to post the WC squadrons in CHS later to serve in Europe?
Thanks,
Tom
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:09 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: timtom
Hi Don,
Could I possibly ask you to post the WC squadrons in CHS later to serve in Europe?
Thanks,
Tom
Sorry, I have retired from the CHS team. Perhaps the current guys will take a look ....
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:38 am
by m10bob
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: m10bob
1.I am using CHS and have in 1/1944 captured most of northen Japan.
Shikka now has a Russian I 16mod24 squadron, which is assigned to the "Far East Command".(I never got any messages indicating it was coming.)
By the time it showed up, I already had been there a couple of months and I have American and Canadian units there.
The Soviets are not active..
I had taken this city from Japanese forces.
I use Andrews' ext map mod.
2.One of my American replacement units a few months ago was the 56th fighter group.
IIRC, this was Hub Zemke's famous unit, part of the 8th A.F., in ETO..
Please correct me if I am wrong?
The 56th Operated out of California in May-June, 1942, then from Nome and later Anchorage for the rest of 1942. See answer above.
Thank you Don..I did not know of their deployments prior to maybe 1944.
I have explicit trust in the work you did.
Ref my other problem, (Soviet unit at Shikka).. Is it possible Shikka is supposed to be a Soviet base and somehow the Japanese were there "wrongfully"?
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 2:24 am
by Andrew Brown
ORIGINAL: m10bob
Ref my other problem, (Soviet unit at Shikka).. Is it possible Shikka is supposed to be a Soviet base and somehow the Japanese were there "wrongfully"?
I don't think that is a CHS specific problem. I think that some bases "default" to a certain ownership when they are captured, but I am not sure of the specifics.
Andrew
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:55 am
by m10bob
I had read several other threads where people thought the North Pacific theatre was a waste of time. I wanted to see why.
I have eliminated much Japanese industry by taking the northen islands, (as large as Great Britain, I would imagine so !).
Maybe this is the first time this has ever been seen as an issue?
Playing against the AI, I believe it should be showing more "response-agression" than what I have encountered.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:11 am
by timtom
Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate. The Allied player starts with one F-4 sqd and receives another at D+54. These two sqds have to be sustained with a repl rate of 2 - ie the these sqds can affort to lose roughly 1 aircraft pr month, anything else will push you in the red. The F-5A repl rate is 1, starting 06/42. One F-5A sqd arrives on D+185, and the 82nd TR sdq, equipped with B-18s, upgrades to the F-5A (PDU OFF) So, presuming no F-5A losses at all, the 82nd will be able to upgrade about mid-43. The situation will remain critical with regards to dedicated Allied recon assets until the arrival of the F-5C and the F-6C in the autumn of '43. In other words, one would do well to hold onto the Dutch CW-22's, not because they theoretically upgrades to F-5A's, but because they have a repl rate of 5. Working as designed? [:)]
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:05 pm
by Andrew Brown
ORIGINAL: timtom
Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate.
....
Working as designed? [:)]
That is a question for Mike, but the rates do look a bit low.
Andrew
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:34 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: timtom
Just wondering about the F-4, F-5A replacement rate. The Allied player starts with one F-4 sqd and receives another at D+54. These two sqds have to be sustained with a repl rate of 2 - ie the these sqds can affort to lose roughly 1 aircraft pr month, anything else will push you in the red. The F-5A repl rate is 1, starting 06/42. One F-5A sqd arrives on D+185, and the 82nd TR sdq, equipped with B-18s, upgrades to the F-5A (PDU OFF) So, presuming no F-5A losses at all, the 82nd will be able to upgrade about mid-43. The situation will remain critical with regards to dedicated Allied recon assets until the arrival of the F-5C and the F-6C in the autumn of '43. In other words, one would do well to hold onto the Dutch CW-22's, not because they theoretically upgrades to F-5A's, but because they have a repl rate of 5. Working as designed? [:)]
There is a factory at the United States Base building Five CW-22 Falcon recon planes per month. In Jan/42 the CW-22 and the factory convert to F5A Lighting. Then in May/43 the F5A (and the factory) convert to F5C.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:03 am
by akdreemer
ORIGINAL: m10bob
I had read several other threads where people thought the North Pacific theatre was a waste of time. I wanted to see why.
I have eliminated much Japanese industry by taking the northen islands, (as large as Great Britain, I would imagine so !).
Maybe this is the first time this has ever been seen as an issue?
Playing against the AI, I believe it should be showing more "response-agression" than what I have encountered.
Yeah, and eraly grab by the Allies for Marcus Island can really set up the Japanese for some nasty surprised when playingagainst the AI, and even PBEM if the Japanese fail to reinforce it. Marcus is importan because it is an excellent left flank postition for the North Pacific Advance.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:37 pm
by timtom
The Vickers Mark VI tank (slot 481) seems to be defined as an aircraft gun.
Noticed that when assigning pilots to the multiple WC squadrons starting the game with no pilots, the pilots a) weren't drawn from the pool b) appeared in alphabetical order and c) generally had a very high xp level, averaging in the mid 70's. Bug?
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:51 pm
by timtom
One imagins all sorts of hilarity at roll-call [:)]
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:37 pm
by Monter_Trismegistos
Band of real brothers?
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:22 am
by Ron Saueracker
I have this too, and one unit is all CDRs! Where did you get the art? I like it alot.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 11:11 am
by timtom
I think Subchaser made it ([&o]go figure) for UV. He did a number of alternative drop screens at some point. They're available at Spooky's - except this one as far as I can tell. You're welcome to it of course. I'll need to know where to send it though [:)]
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:46 pm
by timtom
Device slot 360 CW Rifle Squad upgrades to 356 Indian Light Squad. Same in stock. Just wondering...
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:22 pm
by witpqs
Andrew said that one is on his fix list.
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:13 pm
by Andrew Brown
ORIGINAL: witpqs
Andrew said that one is on his fix list.
Yes. it is fixed.
Andrew
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:39 am
by witpqs
[&o]
RE: 2nd USMC Para Btn
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:40 pm
by Ron Saueracker
Broken Hill Proprietary
The Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited's ("BHP") ownership of shipping commenced late in 1917, following several years of chartering and nominee-participation. Success of the mining origins, in the west of New South Wales during the mid-1880s - the Company was incorporated in Melbourne in August 1885 - and the Port Pirie smelting operations and Newcastle coal linkages established by the turn of the century all contributed to the perceived shipping need and it was a natural progression.
Chartering and ownership of variously-named ships preceded the 1920 commencement in service (under fresh names) of the first of BHP's "Iron-named" ships, Iron Baron and Iron Prince, though Interstate Steamships Limited's Iron Monarch had been serving BHP from slightly earlier. The period to the late 1930s included difficult economic times for the nation and during that stage Australian Iron & Steel Limited became a BHP subsidiary.
As the Second World War opened, the Company had eight ships in service , while two "new-builds" joined these as the war progressed:-
Ship Built Gross Tons In Service
Iron Knob 1922 3349 1923-1955
Iron Master 1921 3351 1923-1957
Iron Prince 1923 3352 1923-1956
Iron Warrior 1923 3345 1925-1957
Iron Baron 1936 4584 1936-1966
Iron King 1936 4584 1936-1967
Iron Knight 1937 4812 1937-1943
Iron Chieftain 1937 4812 1937-1942
Iron Monarch 1943 4816 1943-1972
Iron Duke 1943 4818 1943-1970
From early in the war, the ships were strengthened to various levels, to bear gun platforms, to carry naval ("D.E.M.S.") gunners, to have anti-mine paravane booms fitted to the bows and to carry extra rafts and emergency supply and rescue equipment. Lives were saved later as a result and further defensive improvements occurred as the war progressed.
Two BHP ships were lost to enemy action, both "close to home". Iron Chieftain, en route Newcastle-Whyalla at night on 3 June 1942, was torpedoed and sunk east of Sydney by Japanese submarine I.24. Her Master and Chief Engineer were among the twelve crew lost. The thirty-seven survivors were rescued from a raft by HMAS Bingera and from a lifeboat washed onto The Entrance beach. Early February 1943 found a ten-merchant ship escorted convoy (OC 8) en route Melbourne-Newcastle, with Iron Knight, fully laden with iron ore, the leading vessel. Off Eden on 7 February, she fell victim to Japanese submarine I.21. Torpedoed and sinking immediately, the crew loss totalled thirty-six, including the Master. Fourteen survivors were taken, from a raft, to Sydney.
The company Interstate Steamships Pty. Limited had worked in close association with BHP for many years. At 1941 it owned two ships: Iron Crown (built 1922, 3353 gt, in service 1923-1942) and Echunga (built 1922, 3362gt, in service 1925-1957). BHP's important wartime activities were indirectly impacted by the loss, laden with iron ore, of Iron Crown on 4 June 1942. Torpedoed by Japanese submarine I.27 off Cape Howe, Victoria, she went down, with thirty eight of her forty two crew lost.
There were other shipping losses which, while not of their own vessels, impacted directly on BHP's specialist maritime operations: on 12 June 1942, off Sydney, the Panamian ship Guatemala, bound from Newcastle to Whyalla carrying coke and on 11 April 1943, off Lord Howe Island, the Yugoslav Recina bound Whyalla-Newcastle carrying ironstone. Both torpedoed, they were among a number of ships made available to Australia by the British Ministry of War Transport, as a result of greater access to charterings following the 1941 Mediterranean campaigns.
Through the improving counter-offensive years of the war, BHP's fleet, though not always without industrial difficulties, sustained its service to the nation's major heavy industries sector, Australia's platform for post-war re-building and the Company's threshold for its new era's ships.
Thought perhaps these vessels might be included.