Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

I think we are shaping up for some climactic tank battles around Canton in the next few weeks....judging where IJA tank units are and likely to go...
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17536
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by RangerJoe »

I also think that the Southern move is the big one. The rest is fluff but he might try something but your LBA and DD SCTFs should be able to slow those ships down. But the Southern move can have his LBA in support much more than the ships trying to break out from Singapore which would be a long way into your LBA coverage. If you can, maybe have some attack bombers with excellent crews on night Naval Attack to mess things up. Otherwise, as you pointed out earlier, for the IJN carriers put some 4Es on high level naval attack to mess up his fighters. You could also do that in the north if you suspect a CAP trap that the 4Es can handle.

As far as Chungking goes, can you move some of those Chinese corps that have only disabled devices out so they can get supplies and heal? I would not give them replacements until they are out of the danger zone and if their experience is already the highest that they can get through training. Even then, if they don't have enough support devices, I would not give them infantry squads when they do get replacements until they have enough support.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2097
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Encircled »

Lowpe wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:44 pm
JanSako wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:32 pm I think the Southern move is a genuine breakout, but the Singers grouping is in position to make a run for it if you move DS South to pursue his carriers. I would expect a ton of LBA in Babel & Co too.
Probably trying to bring more fuel home if he can & some of the heavies, while leaving enough behind to make you think twice about uncovering South China Sea completely.
A good thought, a good plan.

Any others?
Makes sense

He can't keep the IJN in the DEI and a run through the South China Sea is suicidal - he might gamble on getting this done while you have quite a lot of stuff to do in the Vietnam area

Thing is, its probably better for you that its the southern break out - will give you at least a couple of weeks of relative peace in the South China Sea

So yeah, and activate the Pakhoi plan

Can you grab Hainan Island as well?
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

RangerJoe wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 2:30 pm I also think that the Southern move is the big one. The rest is fluff but he might try something but your LBA and DD SCTFs should be able to slow those ships down. But the Southern move can have his LBA in support much more than the ships trying to break out from Singapore which would be a long way into your LBA coverage. If you can, maybe have some attack bombers with excellent crews on night Naval Attack to mess things up. Otherwise, as you pointed out earlier, for the IJN carriers put some 4Es on high level naval attack to mess up his fighters. You could also do that in the north if you suspect a CAP trap that the 4Es can handle.

As far as Chungking goes, can you move some of those Chinese corps that have only disabled devices out so they can get supplies and heal? I would not give them replacements until they are out of the danger zone and if their experience is already the highest that they can get through training. Even then, if they don't have enough support devices, I would not give them infantry squads when they do get replacements until they have enough support.
already doing it....I can't really get supplies outside of Chungking yet. Well, I could, but I might weaken Chungking too much doing that.

Not enough supplies to create replacements in Chungking...
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Encircled wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 2:43 pm
Lowpe wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:44 pm
JanSako wrote: Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:32 pm I think the Southern move is a genuine breakout, but the Singers grouping is in position to make a run for it if you move DS South to pursue his carriers. I would expect a ton of LBA in Babel & Co too.
Probably trying to bring more fuel home if he can & some of the heavies, while leaving enough behind to make you think twice about uncovering South China Sea completely.
A good thought, a good plan.

Any others?
Makes sense

He can't keep the IJN in the DEI and a run through the South China Sea is suicidal - he might gamble on getting this done while you have quite a lot of stuff to do in the Vietnam area

Thing is, its probably better for you that its the southern break out - will give you at least a couple of weeks of relative peace in the South China Sea

So yeah, and activate the Pakhoi plan

Can you grab Hainan Island as well?
there are some IJA troops on the back base...but I am prepped for it. ;)
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by CaptBeefheart »

I'd say the southern breakout is real and the Sing forces are ready to move once he thinks the South China Sea is less dangerous.

Is it too early to go after Formosa? Those three bases to the east of Hong Kong are also nice targets. It's doubtful they'd be heavily defended. You get a beachhead in force there and IJA forces to the west have to be shifted all of a sudden. You'll probably reply that your forces investing Saigon and other parts of Indochina are prepping for Formosa and Southern China.

Pakhoi has the benefit of likely being able to supply the Chinese interior, so that's good if you have plenty of supplies to feed the beast, but I'd more boldly go if the forces are available. Also, regarding Hainan, are those bases neutralized? That's a potential thorn in the side.

Anyway, keep up the good work. This is very interesting.

Cheers,
CB
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Still working on the turn...very busy irl slowing me down, but this is a monster turn as I really need to cover both breakouts and plan the Pakhoi/Hainan and Formosa ops.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

CaptBeefheart wrote: Mon Jul 10, 2023 1:33 am I'd say the southern breakout is real and the Sing forces are ready to move once he thinks the South China Sea is less dangerous.

Is it too early to go after Formosa? Those three bases to the east of Hong Kong are also nice targets. It's doubtful they'd be heavily defended. You get a beachhead in force there and IJA forces to the west have to be shifted all of a sudden. You'll probably reply that your forces investing Saigon and other parts of Indochina are prepping for Formosa and Southern China.

Pakhoi has the benefit of likely being able to supply the Chinese interior, so that's good if you have plenty of supplies to feed the beast, but I'd more boldly go if the forces are available. Also, regarding Hainan, are those bases neutralized? That's a potential thorn in the side.

Anyway, keep up the good work. This is very interesting.

Cheers,
CB
Correct, I need the access to the Saigon port for Formosa (Kagi, Hengchun) if needed a direct invasion on Samah (Hainan). I think I can do Pakhoi in 2 days or so.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Sept 17, 1943

Our subs get some damage in:
a.jpg
a.jpg (392.82 KiB) Viewed 528 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Looks like the IJ ships just stayed here...we had some night attacks and spotted a heavy cruiser.
A20BismarckSea.jpg
A20BismarckSea.jpg (468.87 KiB) Viewed 527 times
Night Air attack on TF, near Kuantan at 52,81

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Allied aircraft
OS2U-3 Kingfisher x 6

Allied aircraft losses
OS2U-3 Kingfisher: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Maya
DD Naganami

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x OS2U-3 Kingfisher bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb

Night Air attack on TF, near Kuantan at 52,81

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 17 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25D1 Mitchell x 3

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAP Hakone Maru
xAP Asama Maru

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-25D1 Mitchell bombing and strafing from low level
Naval Attack: 6 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

KB moves closer to Mindanao...I suspect some Helldivers will test the defense of them....
admiral.jpg
admiral.jpg (351.51 KiB) Viewed 526 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

IJN fails to bombard Vinh...probably securing the base...and Hellcats sweep the harbor. Our ASW ships damages 2-3 Iboats while numerous reported hits from aerial ASW around Quinhon. You can see we are pushing here.
animated armor image.jpg
animated armor image.jpg (540.47 KiB) Viewed 524 times
Morning Air attack on Haiphong , at 68,57

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 42 NM, estimated altitude 41,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 17 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zero x 2
A6M8 Zero x 2
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 5
Ki-61-Id Tony x 3

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed
A6M8 Zero: 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 3 destroyed
Ki-61-Id Tony: 2 destroyed

No Allied losses
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

IJN breakout continues...our aerial coordination needs improving...2 hits secured.
b.jpg
b.jpg (564.49 KiB) Viewed 522 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

b2.jpg
b2.jpg (438.25 KiB) Viewed 519 times
Both hits on this girl.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Sweep aside the IJ air defenses over Saigon, and bomb them...
b1.jpg
b1.jpg (160.98 KiB) Viewed 517 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Afternoon attack a little more deadly....sinking sounds heard.
b3.jpg
b3.jpg (619.53 KiB) Viewed 516 times
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Tandjoengselor at 70,94

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 57 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 21 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 2
A6M5 Zero x 4
A6M5c Zero x 1
A6M8 Zero x 34
F1M2 Pete x 6
Ki-43-IIIa Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 19
F4U-1 Corsair x 8
SBD-5 Dauntless x 43

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 4 destroyed
F4U-1 Corsair: 1 destroyed
SBD-5 Dauntless: 11 destroyed, 3 damaged

Japanese Ships
CVE Hosho, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
CVE Taiyo, Bomb hits 4, on fire
DD Yamanagiri

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
13 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
1 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Air attack on KB east of Mindanao...KB moved out of range of our HB flying high.

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Siargao at 84,91

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 74 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 32 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 2
A6M5b Zero x 2
A6M8 Zero x 191
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 2

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 25
SB2C-1C Helldiver x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M8 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 4 destroyed
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 14 destroyed

CAP engaged:
251 Ku S-1 with A6M8 Zero (3 airborne, 15 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 36 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
253 Ku S-2 with A6M5b Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 3000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 3000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes
2 planes vectored on to bombers
281 Ku S-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 3000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 3000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes
2 planes vectored on to bombers
Akagi-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 15 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 7 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 22000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 22 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
Kaga-1 with A6M8 Zero (4 airborne, 16 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 17000 , scrambling fighters between 16000 and 21000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 22 minutes
20 planes vectored on to bombers
Soryu-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 12 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 2 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
12 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiryu-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 12 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 17000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
10 planes vectored on to bombers
Zuikaku-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 15 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 7 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 17000 , scrambling fighters between 12000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes
15 planes vectored on to bombers
Ryujo-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 15 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 9000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 35 minutes
15 planes vectored on to bombers
Junyo-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 17000 and 22000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 37 minutes
15 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiyo-1 with A6M8 Zero (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 14000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 24 minutes
10 planes vectored on to bombers
Shoho-1 with A6M8 Zero (4 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 22000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 31 minutes
10 planes vectored on to bombers
24th Sentai with Ki-43-IV Oscar (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 3000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 3000.
Raid is overhead
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Lost a fair number of SBDs...and some Beaufighters down low....but the IJN carriers probably can't carry on operations and they seem to be heading in a very dangerous waters.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Attack at Tourane...should take the base with the next attack:

Ground combat at Tourane (66,65)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 10140 troops, 241 guns, 87 vehicles, Assault Value = 449

Defending force 4568 troops, 15 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 163

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Allied adjusted assault: 277

Japanese adjusted defense: 99

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), disruption(-), preparation(-)
fatigue(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
212 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 27 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Allied ground losses:
228 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 25 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
1st Marine Division
2nd Marine/A Division

Defending units:
2nd Militia Regiment
3rd Militia Regiment
3rd JAAF AF Coy
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Post by Lowpe »

Forts 2 here....waiting for our combat engineer units to arrive...

Ground combat at Saigon (60,71)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 18493 troops, 229 guns, 219 vehicles, Assault Value = 1473

Defending force 22946 troops, 214 guns, 120 vehicles, Assault Value = 498

Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
32nd Infantry Division
2/9th Armoured Regiment
4th Marine Division
27th Infantry Division
33rd Infantry Division
1st Australian Division
145th Field Artillery Battalion
XI US Corps
134th Field Artillery Battalion
33rd Medium Regiment

Defending units:
2nd Tank Regiment
14th Tank Regiment
1st Militia Regiment
Cape St.Jaques Fortress
16th Guards Regiment
4th Division
112th Infantry Rgt /1
25th Air Defense AA Regiment
8th JNAF Coy
12th Base Force
6th JNAF Coy
11th Air Flotilla
9th JAAF AF Coy
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”