Hairy Asian Experiences - GreyJoy (J) vs. Q-Ball (A)

[Itdepends]

He must be refueling the PT's with something or they'd be accumulating system damage like anything- a mother ship with larger bunkers. RE current options- you really want to be going after his assault shipping- it's one of his most valuable assets. What's he mining with in the DEI? Aerial minelaying?

[GreyJoy]

I have listened to Veji1 this time. I've raised the subject with Brad and want to hear what he thinks about it. It will be an open disccussion....
 
but the war doesn't wait
 
 
May 26 1943
 
So the allied landed the 7th US Division (yet no marines around!?!?!?) and a tank regiment at Tulagi. 3 BBs bombed the hell out of it during the night and several bomber squadrons attacked during the day....
My garrison there is composed of second line troops...low morale, no heavy equipment, no HQ...and, above all, no supplies... yet at the very first american attack they held! Obtaining a great 1-2!!! [:D][:D]
I know this won't last... but it feels good to know that my guys are able to fight till their death
 
near Munda a bait TF composed of 2 DDs LRCAPPED by 50 fighters attracted 20 Judys of mine... lost 10 zeros and 15 Judies for no gain....[:@]
 
P-47s are now sweeping an abbandoned Munda... the front is now very close to Boudanville, being Shortland my closest defended base.
 
A new activity in CENTPAC, with the allies that are bombing Makin....and reconning Ocean Island....
 
Enemy TFs assembling at Darwin, Townville and Portland Roads....
 
 

[GreyJoy]

July is coming soon and July 1943 will be an important month.
 
on 7/1/1943 we're gonna see the arrival of some very important air frames: KI-44c (badly needed!), KI-84a and Judy mk-3
 
 
BB Musashi arrived at Nagasaki and now we're assembling a TF for her.  To look back i think it was a mistake to invest all those HIs for her...she arrives too late to e of any help... probably the Shinano CV could have been a wiser investment... live and learn
 
 

[obvert]

Before you think she's not worth it, check out the AA numbers in early 44 (1500+). If you still have a KB then, that's a vey good ship to have with the slower CVs. The Shinano only gives 40 more planes and wouldn't get there until 44 anyway.

You're getting the Judy D4Y3 very early! Nice.

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: obvert

Before you think she's not worth it, check out the AA numbers in early 44 (1500+). If you still have a KB then, that's a vey good ship to have with the slower CVs. The Shinano only gives 40 more planes and wouldn't get there until 44 anyway.

You're getting the Judy D4Y3 very early! Nice.

Oh, that's cool! Never thought about the AA related with BBs... i still think them as an offensive weapon... dreamer me[:D][:D][:D]

[GreyJoy]

So, while we're approaching the most critical time period, the japanese economy is still running. We're having the usual shortage problems of supplies, but, with a lot of efforts, we're managing to keep the levels of late 1942 (2,300,000).
We're now saving a good amount of HI and we've just passed the 1,500,000 step.
Draconian measures are taken to minimize the fuel expenditure for the fleet, but we're still consuming 15,000 fuel daily[:(]...which is way too much considering i'm producing barely 22,000 fuel points every day and the HI alone drinks 14,500 fuel points[:(]
 
But there's nothing more i can do at the moment. I'm already stretching the Empire's possibilities to the very limit and that's all i can do.
 
 
 
 

[Capt. Harlock]

Oh, that's cool! Never thought about the AA related with BBs... i still think them as an offensive weapon... dreamer me

Yeah, Churchill made the same mistake.

[goran007]

ORIGINAL: veji1

I honestly would raise the PT issue at Babar and Saumlaki... Having PTs just cross 200 miles of openwater like that, to just go and park on your islands without local fuel dumps etc just sounds absurd to me...

I would raise it not because Qball is being dishonest or anything, the game engine let's it happen, but because with this mod that already emulates the Jap situation way better than in stock (supply and AS issue, resulting in closed AFs etc..) he doesn't need to use that and it gives him an advantage that is not in the spirit of the game you are playing.

There wouldn't be anything dishonourable about raising the issue at least.

my 2 cents anyway.

ack with my defences here...there isn't that much i can do. The whole south pacif

Whats the problem with PT boats anyway...
Could they cross 250 miles from Darwin to Saumlaki? OFC they could:

Fuel consumption of these engines was phenomenal; a PT boat carried 3,000 gallons (11,360 liters) of 100 octane avgas. A normal patrol for these boats would last a maximum of 12 hours. The consumption rate for each engine at a cruising speed of 23 knots was about 66 gallons (250 l) per hour (200 gallons [760 l] per hour for all 3 engines). However, at top speed, consumption increased to 166 gallons (628 l) per hour per engine (or 500 gallons [1,890 l] per hour for all 3 engines). Navy acceptance trials for every boat required it be able to demonstrate ability to achieve design speed of 41+ knots. Going at this speed, the 3,000 gallons of fuel would be used in only about 6 hours.

Could they be deadly?
Suragao strait:

On October 25, Abukuma met her fate in the Battle of Surigao Strait, part of the overall campaign of four naval battles collectively referred to as the Battle of Leyte Gulf. In the pre-dawn hours, as Shima's force entered the strait, the flotilla was attacked by a squadron of American PT boats. Lieutenant (jg) Mike Kovar's PT-137 fired a torpedo at a destroyer, but it ran deep and passed beneath the target to strike Abukuma at 3:25 AM in the No. 1 boiler room, killing 37 crewmen.

Although in the Pacific they didn't sink bigger IJN ships that doesn't mean they weren't capable doing so.
During World War II, S-boats sank 101 merchant ships totalling 214,728 tons.[6] In addition, they sank 12 destroyers, 11 minesweepers, eight landing ships, six MTBs, a torpedo boat, a minelayer, one submarine and a number of small merchant craft. They also damaged two cruisers, five destroyers, three landing ships, a repair ship, a naval tug and numerous merchant vessels. Sea mines laid by the S-boats were responsible for the loss of 37 merchant ships totalling 148,535 tons, a destroyer, two minesweepers and four landing ships.
(all taken from wiki)

In archipelago 1944 during the night, one TF composed of Fletchers and one TF of PT's should be able to deal with anything IJN had regardless of size. IJN didn't like to mess with US PT boats either on one hand they were cheap and numerous on other hand only one torpedo could sink any ship. PT's should be 'free kill' only for 100feet planes but for other ships not so. PT boats + night= good chance of lost destroyer (not to mention bigger ships)

[GreyJoy]

May 26, 43

CAP Traps are killing me!!!

Brad placed a CVE TF 3 hexes south pf Babar, with LRCAP over 2 DDs at Babar itself... several scattered groups of Frances/Betties took off, always escorted...and it ended up with a useless slaughterfest.
Lost 70 planes for no reason[:o][:o]. Even if they passes through the heavy CAP, obviously torpedo planes are harmless against 2 nimble DDs... and i'm losing an avg of 50 planes and 20 pilots every day because of these traps[:(]

He bombed Taberfane, Munda and Tulagi with several cruisers.... while his air force started to bomb Terapo... he's growing stronger each day and i'm losing the grip on this match... supplies are low everywhere south of Truk and my front line bases in the southern DEI are all badly damaged, out of supplies and with little or no hope of relief. CAP traps are forcing me to keep my anti-naval assets at bay and his 4Es and bombardment TFs are doing the rest of the job. Brad knows how to advance, that's for sure....



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Tulagi at 114,137

Allied Ships
CA Vincennes
CA Quincy
CL St. Louis
DD Benham
DD Dunlap
DD Abbot
DD Fletcher

Japanese ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 15
Port hits 18
Port supply hits 4


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Taberfane at 82,117

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CA Chicago
CL Denver
CL Nashville
CL Java
CL Achilles
DD Worden
DD Craven
DD Walke
DD Chevalier

Japanese ground losses:
573 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 23 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 10 disabled
Guns lost 4 (1 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Airbase hits 25
Airbase supply hits 7
Runway hits 89
Port hits 28
Port supply hits 5

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Munda at 111,134 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
H6K4 Mavis: 3 damaged
G3M3 Nell: 1 damaged

5 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
CA Chester
CA Houston
CA Northampton
CA Indianapolis
CL Columbia
CL Newcastle

Japanese ground losses:
241 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 9 destroyed, 59 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 25 (2 destroyed, 23 disabled)
Vehicles lost 19 (2 destroyed, 17 disabled)

Airbase hits 27
Airbase supply hits 6
Runway hits 97
Port hits 37
Port supply hits 3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 48 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18
P1Y1 Frances x 9

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 24

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 7 destroyed
P1Y1 Frances: 4 destroyed, 1 damaged
P1Y1 Frances: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Fanning
DD Shaw

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x P1Y1 Frances launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

CAP engaged:
VRF-1F with F6F-3 Hellcat (12 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000
Raid is overhead
VRF-2F with F6F-3 Hellcat (12 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000
Raid is overhead


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 64 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 22 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 9
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 26

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 3 damaged
Ki-43-IIb Oscar: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Shaw
DD Fanning




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 37 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 3
P1Y1 Frances x 3

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 22

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed
P1Y1 Frances: 2 destroyed

No Allied losses



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 62 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 21 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 6
A6M3a Zero x 12
G4M1 Betty x 9

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 3 destroyed
A6M3a Zero: 5 destroyed
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Fanning
DD Shaw



...and so on....[:o][:o][:o]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Tulagi (114,137)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3771 troops, 62 guns, 44 vehicles, Assault Value = 343

Defending force 4413 troops, 19 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 128

Assaulting units:
7th Infantry/A Division
2/6th Armoured Regiment
7th Infantry/B Division
7th Infantry/C Division

Defending units:
10th Garrison Unit
5th Indpt SNLF Coy /5





What should i do?... Munda has already been abbandoned by my air forces...now he will neutralize Bouganville... and it seems i can do anything against all those bombarment TFs... my DDs would be useless and my bombers can never catch them...or when they do they find themself going against lousy cap traps... it's really difficult to decide how to counter this wise advancing strategy

Well, i guess the only choice i have is to force him to invade, sooner or later, a well defended place...but it's hard cause in the Solomons and in NG there are a lot of empty dot bases and he can simply make a para-drop, followed by waves of PT/DDs to keep me at bay....drop some engineers and voilà: in few turns he gets a level 1 AF with 50 fighters, 200 mines and some 40 PTs.

[obvert]

What I had to do was turn off the bombers. Don't leave them for any random CAP trapping possibility. You also then gain the element of surprise back. When will he turn them on? Where are they?

You'll get shots, but your forces can't be in a mess when he comes. If you need to keep bombers back from recon, then fly them in when you want to strike at a big known target. The Netties won't hit LSTs much anyway either, so if he's using small craft to island hop, they won't do any good.

Can you sweep any non-built up bases to get bleeding LR CAP and wear it down? Have you tried expendable midget subs en masse to be a nuisance even if they do little? (at least when his air patrols spot them he has no idea if they're big or little ones). Look behind his front to see if there are any targets undefended for your G3M3 at long range. Maybe try some night attacks (which have worked for some, but I have found a bit frustrating, with lots of strikes and no hits against sea targets, little damage against land and port).

PS - In your game with the supply limits it makes sense to really try to pick your spots. All of those TT cost supply, as do flying those missions and replacing those planes.

Also I just noticed your Netty altitudes. If he's going to CAP trap, fly them low at 1k. The intercept times will be more like 8-12 minutes, so you may get a lot through without the CAP getting there. Especially if he's flying at 20k. He'll adjust of course. But maybe it'll work for a bit.

[veji1]

ORIGINAL: goran007

ORIGINAL: veji1

I honestly would raise the PT issue at Babar and Saumlaki... Having PTs just cross 200 miles of openwater like that, to just go and park on your islands without local fuel dumps etc just sounds absurd to me...

I would raise it not because Qball is being dishonest or anything, the game engine let's it happen, but because with this mod that already emulates the Jap situation way better than in stock (supply and AS issue, resulting in closed AFs etc..) he doesn't need to use that and it gives him an advantage that is not in the spirit of the game you are playing.

There wouldn't be anything dishonourable about raising the issue at least.

my 2 cents anyway.

ack with my defences here...there isn't that much i can do. The whole south pacif

Whats the problem with PT boats anyway...
Could they cross 250 miles from Darwin to Saumlaki? OFC they could:

Fuel consumption of these engines was phenomenal; a PT boat carried 3,000 gallons (11,360 liters) of 100 octane avgas. A normal patrol for these boats would last a maximum of 12 hours. The consumption rate for each engine at a cruising speed of 23 knots was about 66 gallons (250 l) per hour (200 gallons [760 l] per hour for all 3 engines). However, at top speed, consumption increased to 166 gallons (628 l) per hour per engine (or 500 gallons [1,890 l] per hour for all 3 engines). Navy acceptance trials for every boat required it be able to demonstrate ability to achieve design speed of 41+ knots. Going at this speed, the 3,000 gallons of fuel would be used in only about 6 hours.

Could they be deadly?
Suragao strait:

On October 25, Abukuma met her fate in the Battle of Surigao Strait, part of the overall campaign of four naval battles collectively referred to as the Battle of Leyte Gulf. In the pre-dawn hours, as Shima's force entered the strait, the flotilla was attacked by a squadron of American PT boats. Lieutenant (jg) Mike Kovar's PT-137 fired a torpedo at a destroyer, but it ran deep and passed beneath the target to strike Abukuma at 3:25 AM in the No. 1 boiler room, killing 37 crewmen.

Although in the Pacific they didn't sink bigger IJN ships that doesn't mean they weren't capable doing so.
During World War II, S-boats sank 101 merchant ships totalling 214,728 tons.[6] In addition, they sank 12 destroyers, 11 minesweepers, eight landing ships, six MTBs, a torpedo boat, a minelayer, one submarine and a number of small merchant craft. They also damaged two cruisers, five destroyers, three landing ships, a repair ship, a naval tug and numerous merchant vessels. Sea mines laid by the S-boats were responsible for the loss of 37 merchant ships totalling 148,535 tons, a destroyer, two minesweepers and four landing ships.
(all taken from wiki)

In archipelago 1944 during the night, one TF composed of Fletchers and one TF of PT's should be able to deal with anything IJN had regardless of size. IJN didn't like to mess with US PT boats either on one hand they were cheap and numerous on other hand only one torpedo could sink any ship. PT's should be 'free kill' only for 100feet planes but for other ships not so. PT boats + night= good chance of lost destroyer (not to mention bigger ships)

I get your point but there is a difference between "how far could a PT boat sail straight into the ocean with its fuel supplies" and whether it was practical in times of war to cross 250 miles of sea to be in an archipelago of which you have no control, far away from your supply dumps.

My point is that now that he has a foothold in the SOlomons, I have no problem at all with him flooding the area with PT boats. But in Saumlaki or Babar it just stretches the imagination and uses what I would qualify as a game engine issue.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: veji1


I get your point but there is a difference between "how far could a PT boat sail straight into the ocean with its fuel supplies" and whether it was practical in times of war to cross 250 miles of sea to be in an archipelago of which you have no control, far away from your supply dumps.

My point is that now that he has a foothold in the SOlomons, I have no problem at all with him flooding the area with PT boats. But in Saumlaki or Babar it just stretches the imagination and uses what I would qualify as a game engine issue.

The interesting part of the info above is that they used avgas, not bunker oil as would any of the ships they were refueling from, so those ships would have been carrying a bunch of avgas on deck into enemy territory. Sounds like fun to strafe!

If the Allies had needed to do this, they most likely would have figured out a way. I doubt it would have been anything like a nightly foray by 40+ boats though. That would have been a logistical nightmare, trying to refuel those in mid-ocean in any weather. Now that we know that Q-Ball was indeed doing this (as Saumlaki is too far according to hex range from Bathurst Island in game), it is good GJ checked it out and there is an agreement to halt that particular method.

[PaxMondo]

As goran007 notes above, I don't have a problem with the PT's being used in the DEI and being re-fueled by other ships.  They had the range and they were designed to work in this area in that manner.  Most CL's had AvGas tanks for FP's and even without those 7 skids of AvGas (9x55 gal per skid) or 15 pallets (4x55 gal per pallet) re-fuels a PT and again, that ain't that much space on a DD.  That they are also a deadly pest is also accurate. 

My biggest issue is that they are NOT as susceptible to strafing as they should be.  Fighter strafing a quite accurate and nimble and even 50cal would punch a lot of holes in a PT.  Yes strafing will get them, but I've never gotten more than 2 PT's per attack phase even when using a full group of high exp piloted A6M's.  36 A6M's catching 6 PT's on open water in daylight should be far more deadly than just 2PT's.  And that's the best I've done ... generally I would only get one.  Just feels low.

Hard to hit with bombs? Yes. Strafing though should be quite deadly.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

As goran007 notes above, I don't have a problem with the PT's being used in the DEI and being re-fueled by other ships.  They had the range and they were designed to work in this area in that manner.  Most CL's had AvGas tanks for FP's and even without those 7 skids of AvGas (9x55 gal per skid) or 15 pallets (4x55 gal per pallet) re-fuels a PT and again, that ain't that much space on a DD.  That they are also a deadly pest is also accurate. 

My biggest issue is that they are NOT as susceptible to strafing as they should be.  Fighter strafing a quite accurate and nimble and even 50cal would punch a lot of holes in a PT.  Yes strafing will get them, but I've never gotten more than 2 PT's per attack phase even when using a full group of high exp piloted A6M's.  36 A6M's catching 6 PT's on open water in daylight should be far more deadly than just 2PT's.  And that's the best I've done ... generally I would only get one.  Just feels low.

Hard to hit with bombs? Yes. Strafing though should be quite deadly.

I've never ever lost a single PT to strafing alone. If hit by a bomb, yes, done, but hit by strafing only, no chance to sink.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

As goran007 notes above, I don't have a problem with the PT's being used in the DEI and being re-fueled by other ships.  They had the range and they were designed to work in this area in that manner.  Most CL's had AvGas tanks for FP's and even without those 7 skids of AvGas (9x55 gal per skid) or 15 pallets (4x55 gal per pallet) re-fuels a PT and again, that ain't that much space on a DD.  That they are also a deadly pest is also accurate. 

My biggest issue is that they are NOT as susceptible to strafing as they should be.  Fighter strafing a quite accurate and nimble and even 50cal would punch a lot of holes in a PT.  Yes strafing will get them, but I've never gotten more than 2 PT's per attack phase even when using a full group of high exp piloted A6M's.  36 A6M's catching 6 PT's on open water in daylight should be far more deadly than just 2PT's.  And that's the best I've done ... generally I would only get one.  Just feels low.

Hard to hit with bombs? Yes. Strafing though should be quite deadly.

Hmm, my PT boats seemed to be quite vulnerable to Zeros strafing. Been a while since any such action in my games, though.

[obvert]

Found this. Interesting. Not many lost to strafing in the war either. In fact, just one boat!

PT BOAT LOSSES IN WWII

Out of 531 PTs placed in US Navy service, 69 were lost: 5 - destroyed by enemy surface ship gunfire; 1 - rammed by enemy ship; 1 - rammed enemy ship; 1 - enemy aircraft strafing; 4 - enemy bombings; 2 - kamikaze attacks; 5 - enemy shore batteries; 4 - enemy mines; 1 - damaged by enemy fire then destroyed; 2 - lost in transit, tanker torpedoed by enemy. Total: 26 lost by enemy action.

Additional losses: 18 - grounded in enemy waters and destroyed to prevent capture; 3 - destroyed to prevent capture; 3 - destroyed by US aircraft; 2 - destroyed by Australian aircraft; 2 - destroyed by US ships; 1 - destroyed by enemy shore fire or wild shot from US warship; 5 - grounded/destroyed outside enemy waters or in storms; 6 - fire or explosion in port; 3 - collisions. Total: 43 lost by accidents, friendly fire or sea conditions.

http://www.ptboats.org/09-0-05-facts.html

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: obvert

Found this. Interesting. Not many lost to strafing in the war either. In fact, just one boat!

PT BOAT LOSSES IN WWII

Out of 531 PTs placed in US Navy service, 69 were lost: 5 - destroyed by enemy surface ship gunfire; 1 - rammed by enemy ship; 1 - rammed enemy ship; 1 - enemy aircraft strafing; 4 - enemy bombings; 2 - kamikaze attacks; 5 - enemy shore batteries; 4 - enemy mines; 1 - damaged by enemy fire then destroyed; 2 - lost in transit, tanker torpedoed by enemy. Total: 26 lost by enemy action.

Additional losses: 18 - grounded in enemy waters and destroyed to prevent capture; 3 - destroyed to prevent capture; 3 - destroyed by US aircraft; 2 - destroyed by Australian aircraft; 2 - destroyed by US ships; 1 - destroyed by enemy shore fire or wild shot from US warship; 5 - grounded/destroyed outside enemy waters or in storms; 6 - fire or explosion in port; 3 - collisions. Total: 43 lost by accidents, friendly fire or sea conditions.

http://www.ptboats.org/09-0-05-facts.html

Rammed an enemy ship! [X(]
The scenario sounds very Hollywood - "Darn torpedos won't launch! No problem, we'll just propell them into the enemy with our trusty Allison engines ..."

Interesting that allied aircraft and ships were more dangerous to them than the Japanese aircraft. I know the PTs had 20mm Oerlikons later in the war and a few modified themselves to mount a 40mm Bofors [mainly for barge busting] so strafing them would not have been a one-sided attack.

There is a clue in the loss stats - PTs sometimes traveled with tankers. Perhaps that is a house rule for PT missions over 200 NM from base [200 out/200 back/100 on station fuel], a tanker must be used to fuel the PTs at sea. I know cruiser might have been able to refuel from their avgas stocks, but what cruiser captain would slow his ship to a crawl to transfer fuel to a bunch of flammable corks bobbing next to him?

[GreyJoy]

Thx guys for your comments.
I have to admit that i was a bit unsure to raise the subject with Brad. However he seems to have agreed that the PTs performances are a bit too high, so we agreed not to refuel them at sea, so that they can still reach their max range distances, but they will be forced to come back to a friendly port to refuel...looks balanced so far.
 
May 27, 1943
 
Growing allied activities in the Solomons and in NE Oz, while things at Darwin have a bit slowed down...
two more heavy naval bombings at Tulagi, followed by an heavy air bombing.
Heavy air bombings over Terapo too and over Katha in Burma.
 
The news of the day is that 80 4Es arrived unescorted over Boela. This time, instead of the usual mily run, they found 61 Georges and 8 Tojos waiting for them! The 4Es arrived at 10,000, while the Georges were at 17,000 feet... 4 Georges were shot down (2 KIA), but report says that nearly 40 liberators and fortresses were shot down! That's a great result!!!
 
We're garrisoning Hansa Bay (PGN) and Green Island, while more artillery are reaching Bounganville.
 
Enemy's recon missions over Naru Island and western Sumatra (were we're sending a couple of militia regiments and 3 Tank Rgts)...

[Cribtop]

I agree with Obvert. He's doing this to degrade your LBA. Turn off the bombers (go to nav search to keep up spotting), or shut down entirely.

Let him think he's ready to go when he isn't. Then turn them back on for the real show.

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I agree with Obvert. He's doing this to degrade your LBA. Turn off the bombers (go to nav search to keep up spotting), or shut down entirely.

Let him think he's ready to go when he isn't. Then turn them back on for the real show.

Yup, already ordered that. All my Netties/Frances are set for naval search only. unfortunately i haven't many of them around. some 90 present in the DEI and more 125 in the Solomons... not many air groups arrived lately and had already have to withdraw 2 big groups of Betties in the last months. I had two more Nells groups, divided into tre chutais each, used only for search duties in the Kuriles, CENTPAC, Adamans, Java and Sumatra...

We'll see... i'll do my best anyway