Page 1 of 2
Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 8:20 pm
by Dili
So far what i discovered is this:
No CVL and CVE can employ Aichi Val or Judy dive bombers
Only Taiho and Shinano can operate B7A2 Grace
Hosho can only operate B4Y and Claudes: no Zero,Val or Kates. Obviously even less the later types.
Question:
Can CVE's operate Zeros? Or only eventually Claudes?
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 10:54 pm
by tigercub
I am playing Daironbabes I don`t think it changed what it can carry from stock but my HOSHO has upgraded to 14 Zeros and 6 Kates.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 8:47 am
by Dili
Well it just updates if you let it
But IRL it couldn't do it says wiki:
A later investigation determined on 23 December 1940 that she could not operate the latest aircraft types like the Mitsubishi A6M Zero, the Aichi D3A "Val", or the Nakajima B5N "Kate" in combat.
Source stated for the data is Milanovich, Kathrin (2008). "Hôshô: The First Aircraft Carrier of the Imperial Japanese Navy". In Jordan, John. Warship 2008. London: Conway. ISBN 978-1-84486-062-3.
I found this in TROM:
Late June 1944:
Following the disastrous carrier losses at the Battle of the Marianas, four 140 mm guns are removed and the HOSHO's flight deck is lengthened as long as possible in an effort to improve her utility by accommodating newer plane needs. It is likely this was done at this time before she left drydock on 24 June 1944.
So it is possible that after this date maybe it could operate Zeros and Kates at least.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 10:42 pm
by PaxMondo
guess I am surprised that they could operate Kate but not Val. Any ideas on why?
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 11:22 pm
by Jorge_Stanbury
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
guess I am surprised that they could operate Kate but not Val. Any ideas on why?
no retractable wings?
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 7:32 am
by spence
guess I am surprised that they could operate Kate but not Val. Any ideas on why?
Because of the wing strength required for the Val to act as a dive bomber it could not have folding wings thus it was actually larger than the Kate. So it would not fit on the elevators of the older carriers (same case for Ryujo).
IIRC this is buried somewhere in the text in "Shattered Sword"
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:33 pm
by Amoral
If the question is about game mechanics then any carrier can operate any carrier capable aircraft. You can put Graces on Hosho in game.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 3:39 pm
by Dili
Question is not about game mechanics, i try to be most historical possible.
Now i am just searching if Zeros operated from CVE's.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 5:39 pm
by Dili
From my research it seems Shinyo could operate Zeros and Jill, Judy at least from Hosho example. It had a flight deck of 180m.
Hosho had 168m increased to 180m "In order to service new and larger aircraft like the Nakajima B6N "Jill" torpedo bomber and the Yokosuka D4Y "Judy" dive bomber, the flight deck was extended over 6 meters (19 ft 8 in) at each end to a total length of 180.8 meters (593 ft 2 in) from 27 March to 26 April 1944."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_a ... 33;shō
While Taiyō-class had only 150m so probably only able to operate B5N2 or earlier.
Didn't discovered Kaiyo flight deck , but the ship was only 166m length and the FD is cut before the the bow tip. So probably around 150m too.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 8:41 pm
by Symon
ORIGINAL: Dili
From my research it seems Shinyo could operate Zeros and Jill, Judy at least from Hosho example. It had a flight deck of 180m.
Hosho had 168m increased to 180m "In order to service new and larger aircraft like the Nakajima B6N "Jill" torpedo bomber and the Yokosuka D4Y "Judy" dive bomber, the flight deck was extended over 6 meters (19 ft 8 in) at each end to a total length of 180.8 meters (593 ft 2 in) from 27 March to 26 April 1944."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_a ... rier_Hôshô
While Taiyô-class had only 150m so probably only able to operate B5N2 or earlier.
Didn't discovered Kaiyo flight deck , but the ship was only 166m length and the FD is cut before the the bow tip. So probably around 150m too.
It seems that you are smarter than anyone. If you are that smart, why don't you write the code to make things happen your way? You write the code and I will guarantee, right here, publiclicly, that I will push to get it included. [8D][8D]
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 10:11 pm
by John 3rd
The only way to enforce it would be a House Rule. I, for one, would probably follow it. Think I will in my current match...
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 10:17 pm
by Dili
Yes John 3rd.
I have several house rules.
Navy and Army have separated airbases. Except some floatplanes, or transfer no other navy plane in army base. It is not 100% certain to prevent navy fighters to automatically escort army bombers but usually i can achieve it.
Navy troops are only supported by navy airplanes.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 12:37 am
by geofflambert
ORIGINAL: Dili
Question is not about game mechanics, i try to be most historical possible.
Now i am just searching if Zeros operated from CVE's.
I feel the same way about the subs that can carry floatplanes. I only put Glens on them. But seriously, Dili, this game is complicated enough, yet you are digging up more stuff for the rest of us to incorporate into our games? Just how many post-its do you think I have in inventory? I'm drowning. Please cease and desist. GLUB, GLUB, GLUB.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 1:01 am
by John 3rd
The Gorn has a good point!
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 9:27 am
by Czert
ORIGINAL: geofflambert
ORIGINAL: Dili
Question is not about game mechanics, i try to be most historical possible.
Now i am just searching if Zeros operated from CVE's.
I feel the same way about the subs that can carry floatplanes. I only put Glens on them. But seriously, Dili, this game is complicated enough, yet you are digging up more stuff for the rest of us to incorporate into our games? Just how many post-its do you think I have in inventory? I'm drowning. Please cease and desist. GLUB, GLUB, GLUB.
Well, in movie equlibrium they did have fight for fight, in comunism they have production for production, and dili have HR for HR
.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 4:30 pm
by Dili
Hehehe [:D] For me it is not really difficult. Like Geoff i only put Glen's in subs except those that have Seiran's. Since i am aware of technological specs that is a non issue. Of course this after reading a lot.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 5:36 pm
by Jorge_Stanbury
ORIGINAL: Dili
Navy and Army have separated airbases. Except some floatplanes, or transfer no other navy plane in army base.
Is this historical?
I know they divided theathers between Army and Navy; like South East Area = Navy ; Burma = Army.
But did they do it also during early centrifugal campaigns like the Philippines invasions?
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 8:26 pm
by Gaspote
ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury
ORIGINAL: Dili
Navy and Army have separated airbases. Except some floatplanes, or transfer no other navy plane in army base.
Is this historical?
I know they divided theathers between Army and Navy; like South East Area = Navy ; Burma = Army.
But did they do it also during early centrifugal campaigns like the Philippines invasions?
The only thing I remember of air army is the air drops on Sumatra. Kendari was the main airfield of the DEI before java fall and only used by navy. Some navy aircraft were in Malaya though.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 5:15 pm
by Dili
I am not sure is historical, maybe in big bases there were both.
But to be able to control in game that helps.
What i know for Philiphine Invasion the air forces in Taiwan there was a parallel that separated Navy and Army bombing missions. Logically the Navy had the more distant half part.
For example the Rabaul down to Guadalcanal was Navy and the New Guinea was Army - initially was all Navy.
RE: Aircraft limitations of Japanese carriers?
Posted: Fri May 23, 2014 5:30 pm
by Jorge_Stanbury
I also try to divide them; and as much as possible keep JNAF units servicing Navy planes and JAAF units for Army planes. But there are places like the early Philippines where this is not possible; army fighters on Takao do not have the range to escort bombing missions.
I also restrict Hosho to only Claudes/ Jeans; Glens for submarines, and no Vals on CVLs/ CVEs; unless I am transporting planes