Matrix Games Forums

http://www.star-games.com/exhibits/japa ... radar.html

Interesting and possibly useful site...gives month/year/type specific IJN ships had radar installed.

Wow, it's the long lost Pacific Tide web site. I remember reading that site for news on the game's development back in 1997.. they probably started much eariler than that.

Have they ever officially said it's dead? In any real sense it has long been so...

Wow is right...I never even noticed, was just looking for some info for an OOB. It's deader than a doornail I'm sure. '97, have we been waiting for a worthy successor to PW for that long?

Guys

I purchased the rights to publish the game way back in the the early days of The Gamers Net. I finally got tired of the delays and lack of movement and dropped the project.

I am sure everyone much more happy with Matrix Games <g>

David

In a surface action around guadalcanal the american commander(Scott?) did not use one of his radars because he thought the Japanese were able to detect it. IIRC they were not able to.

Neat site.

This brings up the subject of radar in general, and it's incorporation into UV. It was one of the few countervailing technolgies that could, and eventually did, counteract the initial Japanese night fighting superiority.

I'm curious how UV will account for the existence of and use/misuse/lack of use during this campaign. Does it show up as a training/experience bonus as the campaign goes on?

I don't see a field for radar type or radar operational in the ship status screen. I would think that this would be important and acocunted for not just for night surface actions, but also for AEW for the American carriers. IIRC, once the kinks were worked out, it gave the American's much better usage of their CAP, for obvious reasons.

PBYPilot

I have seen radar listed as a separate piece of equipment on ships and also as part of Base force support equipment. I don't what impact it has in game terms

ic

I remember reading in a book about the south pacific naval combat, that some time turning the Bougainville time the Japanese did have a radar detector for some ships.

"This brings up the subject of radar in general, and it's incorporation into UV. It was one of the few countervailing technolgies that could, and eventually did, counteract the initial Japanese night fighting superiority."

I'm not sure Japanese night fighting was superior, even initially. They did a lousy job at Sunda Strait in February 1942, and were wupped in 3 of the 5 major night engagements around Guadalcanal (Savo Isl - IJN Victory, Tassafaronga - IJN victory, 1st & 2nd Guadalcanal - two IJN defeats, Cape Esperance, IJN defeat). Sunda Strait : IJN loses more ships and more tonnage than the Allies, just barely managing to catch and sink the previously damaged, out-numbered, surrounded, and virtually out-of-ammo Perth and Houston.

Norman Scott was ignorant and perhaps technology biased, otherwise he would have chosen Helena or another SG radar equipped ship as his flagship, not San Francisco at Cape Esperance or as Flag Officer of USS Wasp screen. At Savo, he was riding San Juan, and at 1st Battle of Guadalcanal, he died aboard Atlanta...both CLAAs were not SG equipped.

Good point above regarding radar use/misuse during this period. Do some US admirals/COs (ie. R/Adm Lee in Washington, Capt Hoover in Helena, Cmdr Cole in Fletcher) have a Radar/combat rating? I've seen only leadership and inspiration values so far.

The Japanese did have a decided edge initially -
This was the result of much more time spent training in night sighting and gunnery, as well as superior optics (their big eyes were better than ours...)

Radar countered this very well, but some of those early wins for the US were the result of luck more than anything...

Almost everything I've read suggests that Japanese optics were superior. This allowed them to launch torpedoes before the Allied ships were even aware of the Japanese presence. According to the article in Strategy and Tactics #38 on WWII Pacific Naval Warfare "Thus, at the Battle of Savo Island, the Japanese sighted the Allied ships between 11,000 and 13,000 yards using their special night optical equipment, while the SC-equipped Allies were ignorant of the Japanese presence even when they were but 4,000 yards away!"

Even at the 2nd Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, the optics outranged the radar available to the Americans.

And Jack Coggins writes in "The Campaign for Guadalcanal" that "The Japanese seamen were as good as any in the world and their rigorous training, with emphasis on night fighting, ensured their making the best use of their superb forces of cruisers and destroyers."

Another quote from S&T "The Americans did not overcome all their handicaps in night fighting. The lack of flashless powder, which the Japanese had, hampered the Americans throughout the campaign. The Americans also failed to make use of their spotting planes, which could have been valuable in night actions. The Japanese, however, used spotting planes to good effect."

These are some of the things I've read recently that made me understand an initial superiority in night fighting capability for the IJN. Perhaps I've relied too much on secondary source material to form my impressions.

There are also some encounters that add to the info, but don't fall into the category of major actions. In a night action in February 1942 at Badoeing Straight the Allies lost a destroyer and had 2 cruisers and a destroyer damaged for a cost to the Japanese of one destroyer damaged. And on the night of September 4/5, 2 US APD's were sunk by Japanese surface units.

And with regard to the "initial" advantage, I'm referring to the period up to Savo, because that disaster forced the Americans to rethink night fighting. For example, the Allied surface action TF's weren't divided like they had been at Savo. Both sides still made mistakes but after Savo the battle honors were a little more even.

It is an interesting topic for discussion. And my question still remains about whether the game incorporates any advantages for Japanese equipment and training initially , and American radar (and training) later. Or does it incorporate these into the general categories of leadership, training and experience?

Oh yeah, and what about the Black Cats????

Michael
"PBYPilot"

Every ship has an experience rating for day and one for night. The Japanese ratings for night experience start the game about twice that of the Allies.

At Tassafaronga the USN DDs spotted the IJN force visually before either US radar or Japanese optics picked up their targets. At 1st Balikpapan the USN DD force was not spotted until they opened fire with guns. In general, Japanese night optics for general observation were superior to US optical systems for same, but inferior to US radar. It's been pointed out here that Scott didn't know radar well enough to use it properly. Fair enough. When it came to gunfire, however, there's no particular evidence to indicate that one or the other navy was more accurate. Japanese gun ranging at Sunda Strait was particularly miserable.

With respect to ranging I'd agree that the IJN had a small edge at night fighting, when US TFs lacked radar or the proper knowledge of it's use. And I'd agree that the advantage gave them better occasions to use torpedoes, but that the latter were only principally effective at close range. So an IJN TF that could identify targets at medium raneg and close, undetected, to short range had a good initial advantage.

IMO "twice" the experience is a gross overreach if it means that the IJN is twice as likely to hit anything with gunfire at night.

Most of the Japanese victories had a big share of luck as well.

Once the gun flashes started it was anyone's battle, IMO.

The IJN night optics may have been superior, and so were the people using them. I have read that the IJN lookouts were hand-picked for their sharp eyes and specifically trained for their duty. Don't know what the USN did in this regard.

Originally posted by LargeSlowTarget
The IJN night optics may have been superior, and so were the people using them. I have read that the IJN lookouts were hand-picked for their sharp eyes and specifically trained for their duty. Don't know what the USN did in this regard.

Funny that you should say this......there was a myth in the Aussie army during 42' that the Japanese couldsee better in the dark than the white fellow......testing showed that this was false...it was just a matter of training..... and the IJA trained to fight in the dark, where as the Aussie army upto then had not. Trying to remember back to my days in the army, it has to to with the rods and cones (?????) in your eyes, and being used to using them. Night vision takes about 30 minutes to adapt. It is amazing how much you can see and do at night.....if you are trained for it.