Page 1 of 1
Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:16 pm
by Dgold
I just finished reading an article on the Strategic Bombing of Japan.
The B29 had a range of more than 5,300 miles and the capability of carrying a bomb load weighing 2,000 lbs. for at least half of that distance
I am hoping, that, in Warplan Pacific, this is simulated by:
Giving SB units the capability and range to bomb Japanese industrial targets from Chengdu, China, starting in Summer 1944. Fuel was a problem as it had to be flown from India, over the Hump to Chengdu, for use of the bombers. Therefore these raids should have limited effectiveness.
Giving SB units the capability and range to bomb Japanese industrial targets from Saipan, Tinian and Guam, starting in November 1944. Most of these targets should be in range from these islands.
Will there be a difference between conventional HE bombing vs. incendiary bombing? Will the atomic bombs be available?
Thanks
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2021 8:36 pm
by Platoonist
ORIGINAL: Dgold
Fuel was a problem as it had to be flown from India, over the Hump to Chengdu, for use of the bombers. Therefore these raids should have limited effectiveness.
Even after the capture of the Marianas Islands, the results of conventional high-altitude daylight bombing continued to be rather ineffective thanks to bad weather and jet stream winds. It was low altitude night bombing with incendiaries that changed the game for good.
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2021 9:13 pm
by Dgold
You are correct, Platoonist.
Perhaps to simplify the SB game mechanic, have only two types of bombing: night bombing with incendiaries, and atomic bombs
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2021 10:53 pm
by Platoonist
It's interesting to note that the most sustained and destructive strategic bombing campaign undertaken in World War Two prior to 1942 was carried out by Japanese bombers operating over China. Heavy bombing attacks on Chinese cities like Chungking, Kunming, Changsa and other industrial centers wrecked any possibility the Chinese had of ever building up a sizable domestic arms production industry. This strategic bombing campaign, little remembered in the West today, was a serious effort to force the Chinese to surrender through a campaign based on Giulio Douhet's 1921 theories that a nation could be defeated solely by air attacks on its economic infrastructure.
However, after war broke out in the Pacific and the American Volunteer Group began operating in the air over China, Japanese strategic bombing efforts pretty much came to a halt.
Well, there was the whole balloon bombing fiasco, but that was something of a bust. [:D]
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2021 6:25 pm
by Dgold
In this game, without an effective US strategic bombing campaign to cripple Japanese production, how are the Allies supposed to invade and conquer the Japanese home Islands?
Are there atomic bombs in this game?
If not, and the Allies have to conquer the Japanese home islands using ground troops, will the Japanese get many free home guard/militia units?
Alvaro, could we please have a response from you in this matter?
Thanks
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:29 pm
by AlvaroSousa
There are 2 atomic bomb events.
Victory is based on victory points which means you don't have to invade the home islands.
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 3:52 am
by Redmarkus5
ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa
There are 2 atomic bomb events.
Victory is based on victory points which means you don't have to invade the home islands.
OK, but the issue of US strategic bombing ranges surely needs to be addressed...?
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 11:12 am
by AlvaroSousa
I increased the US strat bomber +2 range. But I get a feeling they are 14 for a specific reason and I forgot why.
RE: Strategic Bombing of Japan
Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 12:30 pm
by gwgardner
There was discussion during beta re range vs effectiveness of strat bombing against Japan. Stats showed a big dropoff. Alvaro had to set a range to reflect that. Whether that range is 'settled' is something he'll have to consider based upon more players giving their input.