Utah???!!!???

[velkro]

What up with adding the Utah? I read some posts on it, but wanted to add my two cents.

It's utterly worthless. It soaks up Japanese bombs, but it also soaks up Allied repair points.

I was going to just send her unescorted to Canada to sit out the war, but decided to send it to some po-dunk port to soak up more bombs!

[m10bob]

The decision was made to keep it's presence in,as was the historical case.(If the Japs wanted to waste bombs on it,so be it)..What you do with it is up to you.I find it a nice place to dry my laundry near Panama.[:D]

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: velkro

What up with adding the Utah? I read some posts on it, but wanted to add my two cents.

It's utterly worthless. It soaks up Japanese bombs, but it also soaks up Allied repair points.

I was going to just send her unescorted to Canada to sit out the war, but decided to send it to some po-dunk port to soak up more bombs!

Historically it did both. Although it capsized (sunk), resources were spent removing it.

[eMonticello]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: velkro

What up with adding the Utah? I read some posts on it, but wanted to add my two cents.

It's utterly worthless. It soaks up Japanese bombs, but it also soaks up Allied repair points.

I was going to just send her unescorted to Canada to sit out the war, but decided to send it to some po-dunk port to soak up more bombs!

Historically it did both. Although it capsized (sunk), resources were spent removing it.

Actually, the Navy salvage crews removed the remaining weapons and moved her closer to Ford Island. She's still there today.

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/even ... ph-ut9.htm

http://www.ussutah.org/

[Ive]

Historicaly Utah was a target ship which job was just that, soak bombs.

Although, her cheef watertender Peter Tomich (Croatian nationality) was posthumously awarded medal of honor which remained unclaimed for more that 50 years but that's another story.
Citation:
"For distinguished conduct in line of his profession and extraordinary courage and disregard of his own safety during the attack on the Fleet in Pearl Harbor, Territory of Hawaii, by the Japanese forces on December 7, 1941. Although realizing that the ship was capsizing, as a result of enemy bombing and torpedoing, he remained at his post in the engineering plant of the USS UTAH, until he saw that all boilers were secured and all fireroom personnel had left their stations, and by so doing he lost his own life."
He was also awarded the Purple Heart Medal, posthumously.
In addition to the Medal of Honor and the Purple Heart Medal, Tomich was entitled to the American Defense Service Medal, Fleet Clasp, the Asiatic-Pacific Area Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal. Tonich, 20 year navy veteran, up to this had no medals nor commendations whatsoever.
A Destroyer Escort vessel, the USS TOMICH, DE-242, was named in his honor.
That ship served at the Pacific from 1943 up to 70s. BTW, where is that ship in WITP?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Ive

Historicaly Utah was a target ship which job was just that, soak bombs.

Although, her cheef watertender Peter Tomich (Croatian nationality) was posthumously awarded medal of honor which remained unclaimed for more that 50 years but that's another story.
Citation:
"For distinguished conduct in line of his profession and extraordinary courage and disregard of his own safety during the attack on the Fleet in Pearl Harbor, Territory of Hawaii, by the Japanese forces on December 7, 1941. Although realizing that the ship was capsizing, as a result of enemy bombing and torpedoing, he remained at his post in the engineering plant of the USS UTAH, until he saw that all boilers were secured and all fireroom personnel had left their stations, and by so doing he lost his own life."
He was also awarded the Purple Heart Medal, posthumously.
In addition to the Medal of Honor and the Purple Heart Medal, Tomich was entitled to the American Defense Service Medal, Fleet Clasp, the Asiatic-Pacific Area Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal. Tonich, 20 year navy veteran, up to this had no medals nor commendations whatsoever.
A Destroyer Escort vessel, the USS TOMICH, DE-242, was named in his honor.
That ship served at the Pacific from 1943 up to 70s. BTW, where is that ship in WITP?

For some reason DE-242 is not included in the on-line Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships - which may be why she is excluded. She is in the hardcopy books.

USS Tomich was commissioned on July 27, 1943 and served in the Atlantic until the end of the war in Europe. She then transited the Panama Canal on July 18, 1945 and reported for duty with the Pacific Fleet. I'll add her to CHS.

[Ive]

Builder: Brown Shipbuilding, Houston TX
Laid Down: September 15, 1942
Launched: December 28, 1942
Commissioned: July 27, 1943
Decommissioned: September 20, 1946
Fate: Stricken 11/01/72;
scrapped 01/18/74


The Edsall Class as Constructed

Displacement: 1,253 Tons (Standard) 1,602 Tons (Full Load)
Length: 306 Feet Overall - 300 Feet at Waterline
Beam: 36 Feet 7 Inches
Draught: 10 Feet 5 Inches (mean)
Machinery: 2-Shaft Fairbanks Morse Diesels
Performance: 6,000 bhp for 21 knots
Bunkerage: 320 Tons
Range: 10,800 Nautical Miles at 12 knots
Guns: Three 3-inch; Two 40 mm; Ten 20 mm
Torpedoes: Thre 21-inch

[akdreemer]

A side note, 1 July 1931, Utah 's classification was changed to AG-16. She was also still capable of sailing under her own power (being outfitted with "sophisticated radio control setup". She had been recently reconfigured in 1941 as the Pacific AA training ship and had been rearmed with various 5" (4x5"38, 4x5"25) and I would assume 1.1's, 3", and .50 cals (I am unable, at this time, to find the particulars of her armament). So if we keep her in the game then let's make her more than just a "target", for if this is all she represents then we do an injustice to the men who died aboard her on December 7th.

I would like to think that if she had survived the attack that she probably would have remained a useful unit of the Pacific Fleet training. So how about making her a PG, give her some guns and propulsion, and let her have a role in the Pacific War.

" Utah was changed over in August 1935 to an antiaircraft training ship for the Pacific Fleet, a status ultimately more important than the category of mobile target ship. Fleet officials established a machine-gunners' school that month, and trainees came aboard Utah from several cruisers and the aircraft carrier Ranger. The skill of Ranger's gunners in particular was hailed by the Commander Aircraft Pacific Fleet Battle Force. Thus Utah embarked on a new phase of training that would occupy the remaining years of the ship's life until its demise in December 1941.

After the training was completed, Utah returned to the West Coast and eventually went back to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Utah entered the docks on May 31, 1941. For nearly three months the ship underwent massive changes to the shipboard training armament. Before leaving Puget Sound, Utah war colors were applied in the form of Measure 1 paint scheme. Dark sea gray was painted on the hull and lower super structure and light haze gray to the upper main tops. It set sail for the last time for Hawaii on September 14, 1941. For six weeks it held an advanced antiaircraft firing practice in Hawaiian waters. For the weekend of December 6-7, Utah returned to Pearl Harbor and moored at berth F-11 on the west side of Ford Island." http://www.pastfoundation.org/Arizona/UtahHistory_2.htm

[Ive]

THE PETER TOMICH UNCLAIMED MEDAL OF HONOR
or
Peter Tonic-Tomic-Herceg

By Adam S. Eterovich
Korean War Veteran
Volunteer 4 years

There are only two Medals of Honor in American history that are not claimed because a next-of-kin could not be found, one in the Indian Wars and Peter Tomich at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941. He died a hero on the battleship Utah.
His next-of-kin, John Tomich in Los Angeles, could not be found and the Navy dropped the matter as his records simply stated born in Prolog, Austria. So, for 60 years the Navy, Medal of Honor Society and the Croatian community did nothing thru no fault of their own. At first medal was displayed onboard DE-242.
Approximately 15 years ago I asked a journalist, Vjekoslav Krsnik, from Split, Croatia to visit Mali and Veli Prolog in Dalmatia and Prolog in Hercegovina and ask for the names Tonic and Tomic and since these were small places , we should turn up something. To our surprise no Tonic-Tomic originated in Mali or Veli Prolog, but at Prolog in Hercegovina Vjekoslav found that Tonic was the Clan Name for Herceg. We had found our hero, his birthplace and his Croatian nationality. We obtained birth and other records from Prolog which were extremely useful. We thank Father Ljubo Krasic of Chicago for help in Prolog.
Admiral J. Robert Lunney of New York has probably contributed more than anyone in his help, cooperation and labor to present to the proper Naval authorities adequate proof that we do have a next-of-kin. Last year he traveled to Prolog to view the original Church and Civil records. His first submission to the Navy was rejected and since then a second Legal Brief has been filed. We also wish to thank my good friend Don Chvarak, a Croatian American War Veteran, of Texas, Admiral Robert A. Rosen, Senators Robert G. Torricelli and Max Cleland. Also special thanks to Mato Herceg here in California and a Vietnam Veteran, a native of Prolog, who updated and uncovered new documentation and president Bernard Luketich of the Croatian Fraternal Union for graciously publishing material on Peter Tomich in the Zajednicar.
The Navy is confused because of “Prolog, Austria”; Tonich changed to Tomich, then being advised that the name is really Herceg and that he is a Croatian from Hercegovina that had been Turkey in his father’s lifetime. It does get confusing.
We are pleased to report to have found a direct relative of the next-of-kin, now deceased, his grandson, Srecko Herceg a Lt. Col. in the Croatian Army living in Split, Dalmatia. He received five medals for valor in battle against Serbian forces in the late war in Croatia. We also have a relative, Mato Herceg, living in California.

TOMICH, PETER
Peter Tonich was born in Prolog, Austria, on June 3. 1893. He enlisted in U. S. Army at Fort Solcum, New York, on June 6, 1917, and served with the 12ti- Company, 3rd Training Battalion, 154th Depot Brigade, Camp Greene, North Carolina, and also with Company L, 47th Infantry, Camp Greene, North Carolina. He was honorably discharged January l3, 1919.
Tonich was naturalized at Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, on October 10, 1918. He enlisted in the U. S. Navy at Newark, New Jersey, on January 23, 1919, at which time his name was recorded as Tonich. Later he used the name Tomich in signing official papers. Tonich (Tomich) served continuously in the Navy from the time of his enlistment and was advanced through the enlisted ratings to that of Chief Watertender on June 4, 1930.
Tonich (Tomich) was serving aboard the USS UTAH at Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked the Fleet on December 7, 1941, and was killed in that action.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

A side note, 1 July 1931, Utah 's classification was changed to AG-16. She was also still capable of sailing under her own power (being outfitted with "sophisticated radio control setup". She had been recently reconfigured in 1941 as the Pacific AA training ship and had been rearmed with various 5" (4x5"38, 4x5"25) and I would assume 1.1's, 3", and .50 cals (I am unable, at this time, to find the particulars of her armament). So if we keep her in the game then let's make her more than just a "target", for if this is all she represents then we do an injustice to the men who died aboard her on December 7th.

I would like to think that if she had survived the attack that she probably would have remained a useful unit of the Pacific Fleet training. So how about making her a PG, give her some guns and propulsion, and let her have a role in the Pacific War.

" Utah was changed over in August 1935 to an antiaircraft training ship for the Pacific Fleet, a status ultimately more important than the category of mobile target ship. Fleet officials established a machine-gunners' school that month, and trainees came aboard Utah from several cruisers and the aircraft carrier Ranger. The skill of Ranger's gunners in particular was hailed by the Commander Aircraft Pacific Fleet Battle Force. Thus Utah embarked on a new phase of training that would occupy the remaining years of the ship's life until its demise in December 1941.

After the training was completed, Utah returned to the West Coast and eventually went back to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Utah entered the docks on May 31, 1941. For nearly three months the ship underwent massive changes to the shipboard training armament. Before leaving Puget Sound, Utah war colors were applied in the form of Measure 1 paint scheme. Dark sea gray was painted on the hull and lower super structure and light haze gray to the upper main tops. It set sail for the last time for Hawaii on September 14, 1941. For six weeks it held an advanced antiaircraft firing practice in Hawaiian waters. For the weekend of December 6-7, Utah returned to Pearl Harbor and moored at berth F-11 on the west side of Ford Island." http://www.pastfoundation.org/Arizona/UtahHistory_2.htm

Sorry guys, but for the purposes of the attack on PH, Utah was in target ship (not a test ship) configuration. All the weapons were covered by protective timbers. Therefore no firepower. If we gave her some, no doubt what ridiculous jobs players would give her....

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

A side note, 1 July 1931, Utah 's classification was changed to AG-16. She was also still capable of sailing under her own power (being outfitted with "sophisticated radio control setup". She had been recently reconfigured in 1941 as the Pacific AA training ship and had been rearmed with various 5" (4x5"38, 4x5"25) and I would assume 1.1's, 3", and .50 cals (I am unable, at this time, to find the particulars of her armament). So if we keep her in the game then let's make her more than just a "target", for if this is all she represents then we do an injustice to the men who died aboard her on December 7th.

I would like to think that if she had survived the attack that she probably would have remained a useful unit of the Pacific Fleet training. So how about making her a PG, give her some guns and propulsion, and let her have a role in the Pacific War.

" Utah was changed over in August 1935 to an antiaircraft training ship for the Pacific Fleet, a status ultimately more important than the category of mobile target ship. Fleet officials established a machine-gunners' school that month, and trainees came aboard Utah from several cruisers and the aircraft carrier Ranger. The skill of Ranger's gunners in particular was hailed by the Commander Aircraft Pacific Fleet Battle Force. Thus Utah embarked on a new phase of training that would occupy the remaining years of the ship's life until its demise in December 1941.

After the training was completed, Utah returned to the West Coast and eventually went back to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Utah entered the docks on May 31, 1941. For nearly three months the ship underwent massive changes to the shipboard training armament. Before leaving Puget Sound, Utah war colors were applied in the form of Measure 1 paint scheme. Dark sea gray was painted on the hull and lower super structure and light haze gray to the upper main tops. It set sail for the last time for Hawaii on September 14, 1941. For six weeks it held an advanced antiaircraft firing practice in Hawaiian waters. For the weekend of December 6-7, Utah returned to Pearl Harbor and moored at berth F-11 on the west side of Ford Island." http://www.pastfoundation.org/Arizona/UtahHistory_2.htm

Sorry guys, but for the purposes of the attack on PH, Utah was in target ship (not a test ship) configuration. All the weapons were covered by protective timbers. Therefore no firepower. If we gave her some, no doubt what ridiculous jobs players would give her....

You know, this has been the problem with CHS design philosphy all along. Fortunately Matrix gave the game an editor, so I have decided to make to Utah a target at PH (basically some .50's, that upgrades to her AA SCHOOL SHIP, not TEST ship, of 12/41 then upgrades to current AA wepons in 1943, then again in late 1944, much like the old BB Wyoming in the Atlantic fleet. I mean we have old Japanese Armoured Cruises running around as minelayers and what appear to be old British Armored crusiers as PG's in the Indian Ocean. But no, the Utah can only be in the game to absorb torpedoes and/or bombs.

This, by the way, is not intended to be a negative reflection on all the effort that went into the developement of the CHS, quite the contrary. I have only the highest regards and appreciation for the product of this labor, but I have given up trying to convince, or propose, changes that are brushed off. Instead I will, with in the framework and spirit of the design, modify as I preceive the need.

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: Ive

THE PETER TOMICH UNCLAIMED MEDAL OF HONOR
or
Peter Tonic-Tomic-Herceg

By Adam S. Eterovich
Korean War Veteran
Volunteer 4 years

There are only two Medals of Honor in American history that are not claimed because a next-of-kin could not be found, one in the Indian Wars and Peter Tomich at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941. He died a hero on the battleship Utah.
His next-of-kin, John Tomich in Los Angeles, could not be found and the Navy dropped the matter as his records simply stated born in Prolog, Austria. So, for 60 years the Navy, Medal of Honor Society and the Croatian community did nothing thru no fault of their own. At first medal was displayed onboard DE-242.
Approximately 15 years ago I asked a journalist, Vjekoslav Krsnik, from Split, Croatia to visit Mali and Veli Prolog in Dalmatia and Prolog in Hercegovina and ask for the names Tonic and Tomic and since these were small places , we should turn up something. To our surprise no Tonic-Tomic originated in Mali or Veli Prolog, but at Prolog in Hercegovina Vjekoslav found that Tonic was the Clan Name for Herceg. We had found our hero, his birthplace and his Croatian nationality. We obtained birth and other records from Prolog which were extremely useful. We thank Father Ljubo Krasic of Chicago for help in Prolog.
Admiral J. Robert Lunney of New York has probably contributed more than anyone in his help, cooperation and labor to present to the proper Naval authorities adequate proof that we do have a next-of-kin. Last year he traveled to Prolog to view the original Church and Civil records. His first submission to the Navy was rejected and since then a second Legal Brief has been filed. We also wish to thank my good friend Don Chvarak, a Croatian American War Veteran, of Texas, Admiral Robert A. Rosen, Senators Robert G. Torricelli and Max Cleland. Also special thanks to Mato Herceg here in California and a Vietnam Veteran, a native of Prolog, who updated and uncovered new documentation and president Bernard Luketich of the Croatian Fraternal Union for graciously publishing material on Peter Tomich in the Zajednicar.
The Navy is confused because of “Prolog, Austria”; Tonich changed to Tomich, then being advised that the name is really Herceg and that he is a Croatian from Hercegovina that had been Turkey in his father’s lifetime. It does get confusing.
We are pleased to report to have found a direct relative of the next-of-kin, now deceased, his grandson, Srecko Herceg a Lt. Col. in the Croatian Army living in Split, Dalmatia. He received five medals for valor in battle against Serbian forces in the late war in Croatia. We also have a relative, Mato Herceg, living in California.

TOMICH, PETER
Peter Tonich was born in Prolog, Austria, on June 3. 1893. He enlisted in U. S. Army at Fort Solcum, New York, on June 6, 1917, and served with the 12ti- Company, 3rd Training Battalion, 154th Depot Brigade, Camp Greene, North Carolina, and also with Company L, 47th Infantry, Camp Greene, North Carolina. He was honorably discharged January l3, 1919.
Tonich was naturalized at Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, on October 10, 1918. He enlisted in the U. S. Navy at Newark, New Jersey, on January 23, 1919, at which time his name was recorded as Tonich. Later he used the name Tomich in signing official papers. Tonich (Tomich) served continuously in the Navy from the time of his enlistment and was advanced through the enlisted ratings to that of Chief Watertender on June 4, 1930.
Tonich (Tomich) was serving aboard the USS UTAH at Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked the Fleet on December 7, 1941, and was killed in that action.

Excellent tale of preservence and research.. kudos to sharing this with us.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior
This, by the way, is not intended to be a negative reflection on all the effort that went into the developement of the CHS, quite the contrary. I have only the highest regards and appreciation for the product of this labor, but I have given up trying to convince, or propose, changes that are brushed off. Instead I will, with in the framework and spirit of the design, modify as I preceive the need.

Sorry if you got the impression that your suggestions are brushed off. Speaking for myself - I think that your suggestions are very valuable. In fact I am starting to crack under the pressure and I am thinking of changing the Alaskan part of the map and adding a base for Skagway (maybe Whittier as well). I must be getting soft in my old age...

[Don Bowen]

This, by the way, is not intended to be a negative reflection on all the effort that went into the developement of the CHS, quite the contrary. I have only the highest regards and appreciation for the product of this labor, but I have given up trying to convince, or propose, changes that are brushed off. Instead I will, with in the framework and spirit of the design, modify as I preceive the need.

Yeah, I'm going to chime in here too. Your ideas are not being brushed off but we are not exactly rushing to make changes every day either.

You have a number of good ideas but I must point out that they are not universally accepted. And many of them have been raised (and reviewed) before. You are not the first to post the list of Americal units from the Americal historical site nor the first to copy or cut-and-paste from Patrick Clancey’s or Leo Neihorster’s sites. Many decisions and adjustments have been made that are not readily apparent. Large numbers of CD, AA and infantry garrison units have been merged into base forces (for instance) and are therefore not individually represented.

For every person suggesting that we add additional ships (like the missing Americal transports) there's another complaining about too much available shipping. We have tried to reach a balance point with this. Historically much of the shipping used early in the Pacific was then withdrawn for service in the Atlantic. We can not do this in WITP so we simply include some and exclude others. This is also true for the large number of US aircraft squadrons that spent some time on the West Coast before going to Europe. We put some in, left some out, and hopefully hit a reasonable balance on available strength. However, it can accurately be maintained that some specific airgroup or another is either present when it should not be or not present when it historically should be.

Good old Utah has been contentious since we put her in and my fingers are staying away from the keyboard until a strong consensus develops or a bribe is tendered.

I like the idea of moving Americal to Panama City, along with sufficient transport, and have it on my list of things to try and get to. There are, in fact, a lot more reinforcements that should come via the canal but we made the conscious decision to stop such research and release the scenario. There are already eight months work in CHS and we could easily put in several more – until it would appear that the damn thing would never be released.

I must say that I less strongly agree with your push to accurately reflect ever class of transport at each stage of the war. Although the cause is laudable (and beyond reproach) the amount of research required in daunting and the effect minimal. I am less concerned than you with the problem of merchant ships and transports acquiring too heavy an AA armament too early. We spent days working on multiple-ship warship classes, going through well documented upgrades to individual ships and developing a single upgrade path for the entire class. Merchant ship classes are larger and much less well documented. And I simply am not convinced that it is worthwhile to further split these merchant classes for a more accurate light AA armament. Having said that, I will admit that I am cutting and pasting any hard data that you post for possible future action.

And I must point out that there are other problems that must be addressed. Indeed, sufficient problems are accumulating with CHS to warrant another release fairly soon.

In conclusion, let me repeat: Your ideas are not being brushed off. I appreciate your research and the hard data that results from it. My lack of response to each individual point represents a shortage of time, not of interest. And your posts are long and well thought out, requiring both time and brain power to review – two things I currently find in short supply.

Incidentally, why didn’t you sign on with CHS back when we started – you obviously have the required level of knowledge and interest??

[Ron Saueracker]

Alaskan Warrior...sorry if I came across as brushing you off as well. I was simply trying to share what I discovered when initially doing the specs for Utah. Originally I had it armed as above then got into more detailed research and found that all exposed positions were basically Fisher Priced against aerial bombs and this was the condition she was in on Dec 7th. Perhaps an upgrade could be added that "removes" the timbers but I think the slots are all gone! I was pushing for a vessel which has no movement to make it even more useless than it is now.

The problem with adding ships which were there but deemed unsafe to use operationally at the front is widespread. Look at the Barracudas, or Clemson/Wickes classes for eg. These are in the game and with the exception of very early expediency or "safe" theatres they were historically rarely used. Players on the other hand just shove everything into the breach. Maybe this should be left to the player (I'm an opinionated stickler) but this (all hands on deck attitude without regard for historical restrictions) invariably happens as shown in the AARs.

But again....my apologies if I came across as a brush offer.[:(]

[Splinterhead]

You could arm her in the class database and give her no ammunition in the ship database, set her speed to zero thus she would be a target on 12/7 and a flak barge afterwards.

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Alaskan Warrior...sorry if I came across as brushing you off as well. I was simply trying to share what I discovered when initially doing the specs for Utah. Originally I had it armed as above then got into more detailed research and found that all exposed positions were basically Fisher Priced against aerial bombs and this was the condition she was in on Dec 7th. Perhaps an upgrade could be added that "removes" the timbers but I think the slots are all gone! I was pushing for a vessel which has no movement to make it even more useless than it is now.

The problem with adding ships which were there but deemed unsafe to use operationally at the front is widespread. Look at the Barracudas, or Clemson/Wickes classes for eg. These are in the game and with the exception of very early expediency or "safe" theatres they were historically rarely used. Players on the other hand just shove everything into the breach. Maybe this should be left to the player (I'm an opinionated stickler) but this (all hands on deck attitude without regard for historical restrictions) invariably happens as shown in the AARs.

But again....my apologies if I came across as a brush offer.[:(]

Well maybe I was a little rash, i have been fighting a lung bug for about too weeks and it has made me edgy, so I apologize if I came across grouchy. Are there really no "slots" open for ship mods?? Are all of the blank slots are used by the AI, or not accessed at all?? I guess what bothers me the most is not knowing the inner workings of this beast, the multible "undocumented code" stuff.

As fas as historical accuracy goes, I am kind of a stickler myself. One can only do and know what it is possible to do and know at any point in time in history, having had this "drilled" into me in countless seminars and classes. But in the case of any historical simulation, getting the god factor out is difficult, so in reality just as soon as the first game turn is played, history is changed, and you have entered into the historical "what if" land, an abomination to many scholars. Such as it may be, the reason why I play games such as War in the Pacific is for the "what if's", while attempting to maintain historical plausability.

On another vein, the"Dewey Dock" at Manila I assume is a floating drydock? This opens up some interesting possibilities.

[Don Bowen]

Well maybe I was a little rash, i have been fighting a lung bug for about too weeks and it has made me edgy, so I apologize if I came across grouchy. Are there really no "slots" open for ship mods?? Are all of the blank slots are used by the AI, or not accessed at all?? I guess what bothers me the most is not knowing the inner workings of this beast, the multible "undocumented code" stuff.

Yes, there are still a number of class slots available. Don't know how many - the editor exposes 1999 but we've seen one or two instances where not all the exposed slots are actually usable. Right now CHS uses somewhat over 1000, about a 50% increase from Scenario 15.

We could easily add many more - the problem is (for me) one of time to research the details. As to ships, we are about at the limit for Japanese vessels and there are balance considerations for any more allied ships.

As fas as historical accuracy goes, I am kind of a stickler myself. One can only do and know what it is possible to do and know at any point in time in history, having had this "drilled" into me in countless seminars and classes. But in the case of any historical simulation, getting the god factor out is difficult, so in reality just as soon as the first game turn is played, history is changed, and you have entered into the historical "what if" land, an abomination to many scholars. Such as it may be, the reason why I play games such as War in the Pacific is for the "what if's", while attempting to maintain historical plausability.

Yeah, I'm a bit of a stickler myself. My early mod attempts (back in UV days) got bogged down in so much petty detail that they ended up being unplayable - even at the scale of UV. When I got my grubbies on WITP I went overboard again. I finally wised up and cut back most of it but you can see a few traces in the Schooners and Independent Companies that made it to CHS.

But playability, game balance, and game mechanics have already forced us to remove or exclude a large number of ships (in the hundreds). After 7 months of solid modding I'm finally playing the game - my own further modified CHS with lots more details. It's a bit overwhelmning and even I am wondering if all the little details are worth while. Also, there are definite execution speed differences between a "small" scenario like scenario 15 and a "full" scenario where max limits are tested. I do love the wealth of smaller AK/TK types though - I find myself constanting looking for the right sized little ship for a given mission: "Oh, Christmas Island IO is running short of supplies - I'll find a small coastal AK and send them a few hundred."

I'm looking at including your suggestions on Americal, if I can get the time. I've isolated the transports and could quickly work up the class conversions required. Still have to think a bit on that third regiment but I'm leaning toward a 33% disabled - although it does unbalance the transport requirements. Need to look into the base force for Noumea and it's transport and I just can't find a thing on escorts.

On another vein, the"Dewey Dock" at Manila I assume is a floating drydock? This opens up some interesting possibilities.

Yup - DDD is the large Dry Dock of the Asiatic fleet. It is mentioned frequently in OOBs and histories so we stuck it in. There were at least three others in the Pacific on Dec 7th - YFD-2 at Pearl (Shaw was in her), AFD-9 and AFD-10 at Singapore. YFD-2 was sunk when Shaw blew up (but was raised) and I think the other three were all scuttled when their ports were lost.

[akdreemer]

But playability, game balance, and game mechanics have already forced us to remove or exclude a large number of ships (in the hundreds). After 7 months of solid modding I'm finally playing the game - my own further modified CHS with lots more details. It's a bit overwhelmning and even I am wondering if all the little details are worth while. Also, there are definite execution speed differences between a "small" scenario like scenario 15 and a "full" scenario where max limits are tested. I do love the wealth of smaller AK/TK types though - I find myself constanting looking for the right sized little ship for a given mission: "Oh, Christmas Island IO is running short of supplies - I'll find a small coastal AK and send them a few hundred."

I too appreciate the smaller cargo vessels, perfect to use of the "milk" runs where an outpost needs sullplies but not 5000.

I'm looking at including your suggestions on Americal, if I can get the time. I've isolated the transports and could quickly work up the class conversions required. Still have to think a bit on that third regiment but I'm leaning toward a 33% disabled - although it does unbalance the transport requirements. Need to look into the base force for Noumea and it's transport and I just can't find a thing on escorts.

As I mentioned in the post under TF6814 thread, I doubt seriously there was an escort assigned. For instance, Feb 27th, 1942 was the debacle at Java Sea, where the ABDA task force had its head handed to it.

Wilmott, in "Empires in the Balance: Japanese & Allied Pacfic Strategies to April 1942", mentions that the US sent nearly 30,000 form the US in January to Australia (TF6814?). In early Febuary, as these convoys moved across the Pacific, their progress was covered by TF11 (Lexington, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, Pensacola, San Francisco; and ten DD's). After it had completed it's convoy duty, the task force was assigned to the ANZAC area.

Why not creat a small base force at Noumea? The 800 man Frence Battailon d'Infanterie coloniale de la Nouvelle-Caledonie(BICNC), along with two batteries of light coast defence artillery (probably as total of 4xFrench 95mm CD guns), was based there. Unfortunatly, the reference that has the exacct composition of the French units is one I have yet to acquire. The above reference comes from Rottmans' "World War II Pacific Island Guide, A geo-Military Study". Using Lee Sharp's "The French Army 1939-1940: Organization, Order of Battle, Operational History Vol 3", and extrapolating from the North African Colonial units TO&E, adding the fudge factor of being in the Pacific, the French garrison at Noumea would be the equivalent to a Lt inf Bn, basically 3xCo.s armed with rifles and mg's (36 squads). There would be a weapons company that would probably have 2x81mm mortars, more mgs, and possibly 4x37mm infantry guns. The only other unit worth mentioning arrived in December, the Australian 2/3rd Ind Inf Co. So altough Noumea was not entirly defenseless, it could hardly hope to resist any kind of Japanese assault.

As far as a US base force, Rottman states that in October, the decision was made to relocate the Main Pacific Fleet base from Auckland to Noumea (FPO SF 131). Ballantine "U.S. Naval Logisitcs in the Second World War" mentions that in early 1942 Auckland was developed into the major operating base for the South Pacific, and that Noumea was only gradually developed. After the landings at Guadalcanal the US realized that it needed a main fleet base closer to the action, and that base was to be at Noumea, as Carter mentions also in "Beans, Bullets, and Black Oil" that Noumea was the best choice because it could hold all the fleet units, was well protected against submarine attacks by Islands and minefields. However, it had no infrastructure.

So I would not be too concerned about a base force at this time as there are actually some base forces in the Central Pacific that could be "borrowed" to fill this need. Let this be a player decision as to what base force to use.

[Don Bowen]

There are a number of histories that mention naval escort, just no details. And it just doesn't make sense that the first really large movement of U.S. Troops after Pearl Harbor would go un-escorted. The use of carriers for distant cover was common, but there must have been some type of ASW/Anti-raider escort. This is one of the two things that is becoming quite troubling.

The other is the one you initially pointed out - the capacity of the transports being insufficient to lift the entire force. In WITP terms, TF 6814 would contain:
1. The Americal Division (at 2/3 strength - not sure how to handle that either)
2. 754th Tank Bn
3. 810th EAB
4. 811th EAB
5. 70th CAA Rgt
6. 259th CD Bn (not now in OOB)
7. 67th Fighter Squadron
8. A Base force to account for the 65th Material Squadron and all the QM units.

Scenario 15 at the 117th USN Base Force at Noumea at the beginning of the war. We removed it of course but it now makes as good a choice as any for a part of 6814. It is Navy, not Army, but it can also stand in for all the Navy Facilities added there later.

As to Americal itself, it's infantry strength was only 2 regiments and artillery was a little light. The third regiment (164th) and more artillery arrived a month later. We could represent this by cutting the number of squads and guns but reinforcement might take a long, long time - much more than a month. We could also give the division a 33% disabled factor - allowing it to rebuild over time without drawing reinforcements. This is probably best but exacerbates the transport problem.

Eight transports took the TF to Melbourne and seven of them carried it on to Noumea. In WITP terms we'd need a lot more, even with up-classing the historical transport. The Base force would need a large transport, the two EAB a medium transport each, the two artillery units a transport or cargo ship each, the fighter squadron another cargo ship.

That's six ships and we haven't even come to the big units.

The Americal Division (at full strength) would need about 18,200 AP load units or 80,000 AK and the tank battalion would need another 21,900 AP or 14,700 AK. That would be at least four transports for Americal (five if we used the existing large transport) and 3 AK for the 754th.

Approximately double the historical number of transports!

So at this point I am kind of stuck. A fully-historical implementation is not possible in game terms and I wonder if it is fully desirable. The game will develop differently than history and copying a reinforcement that happened several months into the war may be inappropriate. It just might be best to simply provide the units at the proper time and let players deploy them as they wish.

As to the other units in New Caledonia:

The French Infantry Battalion was apparently more constabulary than infantry. It was politically aligned with the original Vichy governor and was sometimes used to control pro-Gaulist groups. Also, the French had raised a "Pacific Battalion" from New Caledonia and other French Islands. This unit left the Pacific in 1941 and fought in North Africa. The Pacific Battalion pulled a number of men from other pacific units - probably the best of the officers and NCOs.

There were also several militias - mostly pro-Gaulist but some pro-Vichy as well. There was considerable friction between these units and Australian and American commanders had to tiptoe carefully around them.

The Australians had two military forces and one civilian unit in New Caledonia before TF 6814 arrived:

An Australian Construction Company, under contract to the U.S. Army, was building an airfield on the North end of New Caledonia. This was to be a staging field in the Pacific Air Ferry Route.

Robin Force was a small Royal Australian Artillery detachment charged with installing two six-inch CD guns at Noumea and training French Gunners to man them. The guns were British style and (I think) came via New Zealand. The Australians had imbedded a communications detachment and a few aircraft service personal into Robin Force for their own use but, by agreement with the French, there was no infantry component.

2/3 Independent Company was sent from Australian the day after the war began (21 officers and 312 other ranks). It deployed primarily north of Noumea and had demolition duties in the event of a Japanese attack before reinforcements arrived - especially around the new airfield.

Also two Australian Mine Sweepers swept Noumea Harbor some three days before TF 6418 arrived - as a precaution. Mildura was one of them.