Fighter Frustration - need advice

[denisonh]

Originally posted by Mr.Frag
And Midway happened

Remove Midway from the equation and suddenly Japan no longer fights at a 2 to 1 disadvantage. Why is that so tough to see?

After a strange twist of fate, the entire remainder of the time period in UV was fought at a huge disadvantage.

Allied CV 36 vs Japan CV 24. Fairly simple math there. Wonder why USN beat Japan eventually, they had bigger CV's.

Sarge,



I was a pilot till I went the medical route when I had a stroke and got grounded somewhat permamently. I would venture to say that makes me somewhat aware of how aircraft fly.

Try to not believe everything you read about how great the good guys were and how bad the bad guys were. History tends to be written by the victor to paint them in their own light.

Performance curves on aircraft do not change based on who flies the plane. The difference between a skilled pilot is that he knows his aircraft's performance curves and his targets and applies the right flight envelope to put his target in *his* aircrafts best spot on the graph while denying the same to his opponent.

So why don't we examine the numbers from Coral Sea, the pre Midway scenario, when the supposed experience levels of the IJN are much higher than their USN counterparts.

That should provide adequate evidence to the question of capabilites of the 'cats versus Zeros.

And as for numbers, Mr Frag has point. Since there were few engagements with the IJN having 3:1 or better odds, it is hard to establish what kind of loss ratio would be "historical" under those conditions.

And since fatigue is a critical factor impacting combat that has little supporting documentation, one has to do some subjective analysis when looking at the historical data to derive the effects. A very deep and difficult subject in which I am definitely not an expert.

P.S. Maybe someone should email mdiehl, as he has a LOT to say on this particular subject.....

[von Murrin]

Originally posted by ADavidB
Which suggests that you are probably a fairly happy player at this point in the game...

Dave Baranyi

That would be a YES.

[elcid]

The Zero 'advantage' is not purely technical, but also a function of ignorance of her flaws, and no little arrogance. [This latter is a problem today: a Navy War College professor reports USN fighter jocks are "sure" PLAAF figher pilots are "no threat at all" and do not study their equipment or tactics. Big mistake. One of their planes, the J-7E, is "clearly superior" to the Su-27 according to all who have seen both, and preferred by both air force and navy demonstration teams over all other aircraft. Which means there are some very experience pilots available for some very fine warplanes about which we do not worry at all.] The ignorance factor was lost after Koga's zero was captured and tested, allowing tactics to be devised to exploit its weaknesses. Another advantage was pure training and combat experience. The IJN had the most demanding fighter training program on earth, and many of its pilots had actual combat experience in A5s and A6s in China. Later this advantage changed, because there was no longer fuel for much flight training, and because the training was much scaled down, to the point pilots were committed to combat with only a fifth of the flight time Americans were getting. So it is not all about aircraft performance. And the Zero's performance is not bad considering it entered service before Pearl Harbor. It was fatal to dogfight a zero in an F4F if its pilot was at all skilled, and Allied pilots (when we knew what to advise them) were told not to do that in most circumstances. "Hit and run" tactics were devised. It may be you get this if you commit at a higher altitude in UV. But it does not really allow you to run after one pass, unless you get lucky and the guys get discouraged.

[Drongo]

Posted by Denisonh

P.S. Maybe someone should email mdiehl, as he has a LOT to say on this particular subject.....

I'll get on to it, right away.:p

Last I saw, he was over in the WitP forum being annoyed by cap_and_gown (who wouldn't be ).

[Hard Sarge]

Hi Poindexter


Interesting.

Perhaps since you rested your fighters for that length of time, the Japanese decided they didn't need to send escort fighters over believing that your airfield was nullified(?) Just a thought.

not so sure, as they had a lot of Cap over there CV's a few turns later, maybe the Scen being a later one, the AI is on a more defend then attack mode ? or maybe it was just bad die rolls and the fighters missed the strike ?

don't know, but I knocked down 43 or of 50 Strike aircraft that turn (now that made me happy )

the hassle is the 2nd round

and again, 24 Vals no Zeros, 6 are shot down, the rest break and run !
then the US strikes begin, and it was a slaughter, 48 SBD/TBF lost, half again as many damaged, but did put 3 500 pounders (?) into the big Z, one was a minor "fuel" hit, but the 3rd was a major "Fuel and Ammo" hit, the big one is hurt, but the 2 smalls are good to go, and my CV/3 CVEs are out of strike planes

but my Cat's are happy

HARD_Sarge

[Hard Sarge]

Hi John K

And it dominated Dutch Brewster Buffaloes, the worst pilots the British Empire had to offer in the first months of the war (all the good and well trained British pilots were in Europe, of course),

well lets not go that route, the Brits did send a Spit squadron to the PTO that had fought in the BoB and was seen as a crack squadron, and had a few Aces in there ranks, the Zeros toar them apart, they were used to fighting the GE, and fell for the same tricks that the other early fighter pilots fell for

sort of along the lines of what ElCid is saying, they knew they were good, they knew the GE were good, the JP, well, we'll show em and be back home in no time

HARD_Sarge

[Hard Sarge]

Hi Mr Frag
to be honest, I don't know what point you are trying to make any more

since you know and understand how to fly and how to dogfight, you also know that the "better" plane does not always win the fight

and yes, History is written by the winners, but, it still does not change History, did the JP air power, with more planes and better planes drive the Marines off of Canal, NO, did the Marine air (with Army and Navy help) fight off some of the better pilots in the JP airforce, while out numbered, YES (and as you say, flying a plane that was nothing but a auto kill when sighted, well something like that)

now what part of that do you want to say is written by the winners

I give, you win, the Cat stinks, always did, always will, the press reports about the US winning at Midway, were nothing but a lie to raise morale back home, in Aug of 42, the US and Japan signed a peace agreement, that gave total control of the Pacific to them, as long as they agreed not to say anything about it, so the voteing folks back home would not find out

HARD_Sarge

[LargeSlowTarget]

Hard Sarge, Mr. Frag - what is this about Midway and the Wildcat? I always had the impression that the Wildcats had little impact on this battle (except in the defense of Yorktown) and that it was won by luck and coincidence - the timing of Torpedo 8's sacrifice with the arrival of the SBDs.

[Hard Sarge]

HI LST
LOL, don't ask me mate, he the one who keeps bringing it up

that is why I gave up

HARD_Sarge

[LargeSlowTarget]

Well, history is a matter of perception...

[Hard Sarge]

Hi LST
well to a point I agree, but history is still history

the part that gets written by the winners is more for the people in charge, who want to be remembered for they did

and or what catches the proples fancy at the time

I always remember, about the Charge of the light Bridage, if it wasn't for them, we would all remember the Charge of the Heavy Bridage that had happened earler in the day

the hassle is down the road, when people think it is no longer importent, and start to edit and water it down, and make changes to fit how they think and feel now, instead of then

how much, if anything do we really know anymore about the real past, the heroes of one Generation, are dogs and swhine in another, and then forgotten, or become myth

HARD_Sarge

[Mr.Frag]

Sarge,

I keep bringing it up because the perception in this and other threads recently seems to be that the USA player simply needs to hit the "I win" button and walk away from the game.

The complaint rate now that UV has been adjusted to better reflect reality has gone through the roof

The USN during this time period did not perform well to say the least. They got very luckly with Midway. It had nothing to do with skill. They were very slow to adopt to the new realities of war, hanging on to the old ways too rigidly.

They didn't really learn how to use carier air power until very late in 1943 even with the huge advantage offered by "Midway".

Had the "dice" not rolled their way at Midway, the fact that Japan did adopt to carrier air power into their very way of thinking well in advance of the USA, things in the Pacific would have been remarkably different.

There are very few instances that show Japan in a position to use this huge advantage in strategy except in UV (we get to not loose the CV's at Midway), which puts the A6M's on level footing (which they historically never had).

The F4F-4 did not make a whit of difference and like almost every warplane USA had at the time was very slow to get up to altitude which makes it weak in a defensive roll. The A6M's outperformed the F4F in every catagory from a pilot's standpoint (except dives) which the F4F was generally not in a position to use except to escape it's fate (which I might add renders it useless for stopping a raid as once you dive with a low performance climber, you are out of the fight). The USN adopted tactics to deal with the fact that they were completely outclassed where fighters would defend fighters. Yes, it had a armor plate to save the pilot, yes it had self sealing tanks to prevent fuel bleedout, but these do not help you shoot down planes. They keep you alive when YOU are shot down.

When you factor the additional aircraft that *not* loosing Japan's CV's at Midway brings to the battles we play, you really can not expect the F4F's to do a great deal. The A6M while being a very light plane (unable to take a hit) was very easy to fly and rewarded those who flew it well.

Even *with* the massive loss of skilled pilots and planes at Midway, the A6M still faired quite well in action. It was not until the performer aircraft showed up later in the war that the rolls were reversed. It had weaknesses, but the USA didn't think it were worthy of bothering to find out about due to their same rigid thinking that caused them so many problems in the first place adopting CV doctrine.

The various other aircraft involved generally were in the situation that they didn't have superchargers to deal with the lower air pressure at altitude as part of the "Europe first" issue, what metal was available to make these went into bomber engines to keep the bombers flying above the fighters in Europe. This was a wise choice although it sucked for the folks in the Pacific. You lose a fighter, thats 1 guy and 1 engine, you loose a bomber, thats 11 guys and 4 engines gone. Simple math really, where you want to take the losses ...

Sorry if I've been beating the drum harshly, the real world situation right now with the USA is probably creaping into these kinds of discussions with the current stance of the USA and the Middle East. Folks outside the USA tend to look at folks in the USA as a tad overbearing and high on themselves when it comes to the abilities of fighting a war. You being a Marine should be well aware of the classic "two grunts standing in Bagdad asking each other if they know who won the air war". The basic element of warfare is still the individual guy on the ground with his gun. Everything else is simply toys to impress the kiddies

[Hard Sarge]

Hi Mr Frag
I don't know mate, what complaints, I said in my game, something looked wrong, and looked like the AI was not working right (again, I could park my CV's out side of Shortland, and not be attacked), I sank over 50 AP's, 5 BB's, 2 CV's and 2 CVL's during this cruise and shot down 10 planes ( I attacked and sank two CV TF and sank/crippled both, and was not attacked)

my 3 CV force was attacked by LBA twice and both times, the fighters missed the flight

my single CV was attacked once by LBA and once by CV air

4 months of playing and 3 attacks ?

for history, think you got a baised view of it, Midway, yea, we got lucky, maybe very lucky, but the JP got stupid, there whole battle plan was stupid, oh, we want to draw the whole US battle fleet into action around Midway, oh wait, lets send a decoy group out, to draw off there forces ?, they almost always got too smart for there own good

most of there major losses, they had nobody but themselfs to blame, what became the turkey shoot, was a great thought out plan, you know, until the last day, the man in charge, thought he had won a huge Victory, the leaders on the islands kept lieing to him to save face and not tell him what was really going on, when he started, he didn't know that most of the air power on the islands were already destroyed along with the bases

also, how many times during the war, did the JP have a chance for a great victory, only to have the Commander on the spot, lose his chance and turn away, PH, they got some ships, nasty damage, but nothing importent was hit on the island, old planes and old ships, the subs and sub repair was not hit, the fuel dumps were not hit

Salvo island, a great crushing win, move forward and fight 2 DD's and the entire transport fleet is sunk, it was also almost all the transports in the area, if the Allies lost those, there was nothing going on for a long time (not like our game, PH would just send more)

he was suppost to get to the beaches or die trying, he broke though with light losses, and turned for home, scare of the Airpower that was not there (he didn't know)

the battle in Luzon sea, again, great plan (little too spead out) the CV commander did a great job, the US Navy DD's fought there hearts out, planes with out bombs or ammo, kept making gun runs, the JP Big Ships broke off, if we had a battle like that in UV, we would be screaming our lungs out

you know, part of the hassle, you keep bringing up it was luck, this was luck, that was luck, well, guess what, you make your own luck, Foss was lucky 26 times in a plane that couldn't fight, Carl shot down 2 Zeros at Midway, and then got more at Canal, guess he was lucky too, Foss's 8 man flight, I printed about, 5 Aces and 60 kills, flying planes that couldn't fight, guess they were pretty lucky too

you know, at work I joke, that I would rather be lucky then good, I am already good

you talk about how the Cat couldn't do this or that, then how did it shoot down so many Betties and Zeros over Canal, you got a 4 hour advance warning of when the planes were coming, I think you can climb to Alt in time to be ready to fight

oh well, I am not going to change your mind, you already think we are the bad guys, so be it

HARD_Sarge

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

I think that this all is one classic example of how we all (and under "we" I
think of "western civilization") considered other people not our equal in
terms of technical excellence, command, fighting morale and bravery.


The war in the Pacific was not easy series of "milk runs" - it took more than
3 and half years to beat Japan.

Many many brave soldiers (on both sides) perished in the process...


For us now to (again wrongly) assume that Japanese army, navy and air force
were some 2nd rated bunch of badly clothed soldiers and lead by idiots would
be totally stupid.

This would also be insult to all those who died in war fighting (on both
sides).

Japan had very very good army, navy and air force.

They were, of course, weaker than allies and they never had chance in long run
but this doesn't mean that they were absolutely weak.

The hard truth reached allies only after they first hand learned that Japanese
didn't have some "paper" planes and ships copied from other nations (very
widely stipulated claim before WWII)...



IMHO, the UV (and especially in latest v2.30) gives best glimpse of how really
it was hard to fight in those days.

The US side in UV is in trouble in early 1942 and this is exactly as it should
be. The allied "easy win" never happened in real WWII and it never should in
the UV as well - we have this now in UV v2.30 game!


Thanks again Matrix/2By3 !!!


Leo "Apollo11"

[Hard Sarge]

Hi Apollo 11

not sure if you replying to me or to others, but I never said they were easy, or as some here some, just push the I win button and the game is over

the JP solder was very good, but most times was to suffer from poor leadership and was let down by the over all commanders

the Navy was very modern, and had some outstanding ships, but it was also, let down by the command staff, the high command

the Air force also had some great planes, but most of what edge they had in the air, was designed that way, and once the weakesses were found out, they could not be fixed or replaced

all in all, the spearpoint of the war weapon of Japan was outstanding, only to find out later, that the wood of the spear was rotten

there whole war was based on the quick win, once they failed at that, it was over, they had no way to keep up, the poor guys in the trenches fought to the death, over and over, as did there mates in the air and on the sea, but they didn't stand a chance in the long run

Leadership ruined them, they gambled and lost, but they had a chance, but didn't take it, you had the Army plan, the Navy plan, even though they had a over all plan to start with that gave them what they thought was there best chance to win, things went too easy for them, and they got greedy, and forgot all about the plan they had worked out

but that is water under the dam now

HARD_Sarge

[HawaiiFive-O]

I'm sorry if my stance has been perceived as disparaging to the Japanese or arrogantly American.

I have the utmost respect for the IJN forces. Surprise- I am of Japanese ancestry and plan, after mastering the USN side, to use that knowledge to win as the IJN.

At no time did I claim I desired to win just by hitting the next turn button. In fact, on several occasions I have stressed that this change was a good thing for game balance.

However, I was attempting to discuss what I perceived to be a change in the game environment due to patch 2.3. Now, some don't see what I see. That's fine. I'm changing some of what I do in order to raise the efficacy of my squadrons against the lethal Zero. I hope it works. I personally don't agree that the F4F-4 was a "flying decal" for the Zero, but let's leave that alone. Let's agree to disagree.

Interesting that, like so many other things these days, this discussion has turned into an allegory for perceived American arrogance.

I'm going to have to ponder on that.

[JohnK]

Originally posted by elcid
It was fatal to dogfight a zero in an F4F if its pilot was at all skilled, and Allied pilots (when we knew what to advise them) were told not to do that in most circumstances. "Hit and run" tactics were devised. It may be you get this if you commit at a higher altitude in UV. But it does not really allow you to run after one pass, unless you get lucky and the guys get discouraged.

Well, depends on what you mean by "dogfight."

There are basically two means of air combat; "turn and burn" or "boom and zoom."

When a novice starts playing a military flight sim, they universally 'turn and burn;" that is, they start cranking their stick around and turning as hard as they can horizontally.

Especially in a massively multiplayer on-line sim with human pilots, they get slaughtered by people in less-maneuverable aircraft that use "boom and zoom" combat; fighting in the vertical, minimizing their energy bleed (often also called "energy" or "e" tactics.)

This is still "dogfighting" per se in some sense.but it doesn't really match someone's mental image of "dogfighting."

Turn and Burn (Japan's main tactic) long term, was a loser move in World War II. The side that was Booming and Zooming and had aircraft designed to do it almost ALWAYS came out on top.

It's been a while but I've played in several massive scenarios (100+ players) with Zeros vs. Wildcats (I've always flown Wildcats) in Warbirds and Aces High.

Of course, one can quibble in an on-line sim over precise aircraft modeling, but I think it's telling that EVERY single time you had large GROUPS of aircraft, with equal pilots, equal altitude, equal numbers, the Wildcats massacred the Zeros.

If I was in a 1 vs. 1 duel, I'd want a Zero. If it's 4+ aircraft on each side, I'd want Wildcats.

There were about 8-9 Wildcats destroyed on the ground at Pearl. After that, there was the heroic defense of Wake Island by a tiny handful of Wildcats.

Then you had Coral Sea. I don't see any evidence that Zeros completely dominated Wildcats at all at Coral Sea, though I haven't found yet a specific air-to-air log of Zero vs. Wildcat losses in that battle.

But, of course, after Coral Sea, I'm told that the combat record of Wildcats vs. Zeros needs to be completely ignored because of Midway.

It's the mystical worship of the Zero that is the myth of early WWII in the Pacific, not mindless pro-Americanism.

You can find a lot of quotes of Americans disappointed in the Wildcat, but the problem is what they say doesn't match up at all with the actual combat record of the Wildcat. I think they were disappointed that they didn't have a totally dominant aircraft, that they needed to be careful, and of course the Wildcat paled in comparison to later American aircraft, making the Wildcat look bad in comparison.

Actually, among people interested in wargaming, military history etc., including Americans, I believe a much bigger problem than mindless American chauvinism, oddly enough, is wild overrating and romanticization of AXIS equipment, NOT American, in an oddly counterintuitive way.

This is a MUCH bigger problem for German equipment than than Japanese , but I think in the Zero you see a little of it (and also the horribly overrated Yamato, as well.)

[Mike_B20]

What HawaiiFive-O said

(except for the Japanese ancestry bit)
:p

JohnK brought up some interesting points on dogfight tactics and flightsim experience.
I bought IL2 Sturmovik a little while back and can recommend it as a first rate experience.
The ground attack is extremely well done and flight models have been highly praised by the grognard fans.

Funnily enough, the Russians had a lot of success with the P-39 after removing as much as possible to lighten the aircraft even so far as removing the 37mm cannons.

[JohnK]

Please present your data showing the Zero dominating the Wildcat at ANY time. Any campaign, heck, even any single encounter between large groups of each aircraft...where is it?

Oh, that's right, absolutely all actual data regarding the War in the Pacific has to be thrown out the window after the US got "lucky" at Midway.

Overall, one problem we are having is understanding where people stand; can people please define what, exactly, they're advocating?

My position is that given equal pilot experience and equal numbers, Wildcats and Zeros in air to air combat should have roughly equal kill ratios.

If anything, the Wildcat should probably do SLIGHTLY better long term. The idea that Zeros should do better strikes me as patently ridiculous.

But I'm just a simple-minded drooling flag-waving American chauvinist, of course.


(And regarding pilot experience, the USN pilots on the original 6 pre-war carriers were NOT some sort of collection of hastily-trained nincompoops up against Japanese who had been in flight training since they were embryos as some seem to imply. Most had been fliers for YEARS, intensively trained, and handpicked men since prior to the big expansion of the US military; it was easy to pick and choose in the Great Depression).

All they lacked in comparision with the Japanese was the combat "experience" whacking helpless Chinese out of the air (which, some have argued was, in the long-term, COUNTERPRODUCTIVE to the Japanese when they later had to face a far different force in the Pacific.)

[Nikademus]

Originally posted by JohnK
Please present your data showing the Zero dominating the Wildcat at ANY time. Any campaign, heck, even any single encounter between large groups of each aircraft...where is it?

Hi John. Here's one.

Day one. Operation Watchtower

Tainen Air group escort vs CAP (from Fletcher's carriers)

results:

A6M 2 lost

F4F 9 lost.

(this engagement was the one that prompted Jack Fletcher's "god damned respect" comment about the Zero and it's pilots.)

Note: Not taking sides on this A6M vs F4F thingy. Been there....done that. You asked for an example. All i'm doin. (gotta make use of all those 'books' Drongo teases me about )

I have an idea on what might be causing some players to experience consistantly lopsided results in situations where numbers and/or EXP are not there to explain it.

I'll bring it up with the testers.....though re-producing the 'effect' may prove a challenge as it's infrequent at best.