Focused Airframe production

[pacificbetta]

I was looking at Sally Ic and Helen Ia, both seem to have the same payload of 4x250kg bomb. This is even though Sally Ic has a higher load rating as compared to Helen Ia (which i thought will be useful as a ASW platform). Granted Sally Ic is better than Helen Ia mostly because of plane speed, but does it really justify the drop in capcity when we switch factories?

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Here's what I use to estimate engine need. Start with the AirframeProd tab and fill in the yellow cells. The rest will autopopulate. Then go to the Engines tab and fill in the yellow cells. Again, the rest will autopopulate. You'll then see what you need to do with your engine factories. You can play with airframe production and see how it affects your engine production. (Remove the .txt from the file in order to use it.)

Yeah I'm going to do something like that for Tracker one of these days -- although I do prefer the engine planning button [;)]

[latosusi]

ORIGINAL: pacificbetta

I was looking at Sally Ic and Helen Ia, both seem to have the same payload of 4x250kg bomb. This is even though Sally Ic has a higher load rating as compared to Helen Ia (which i thought will be useful as a ASW platform). Granted Sally Ic is better than Helen Ia mostly because of plane speed, but does it really justify the drop in capcity when we switch factories?

Almost same load as B-17...which has 8x500lbs i think

[undercovergeek]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Here's what I use to estimate engine need. Start with the AirframeProd tab and fill in the yellow cells. The rest will autopopulate. Then go to the Engines tab and fill in the yellow cells. Again, the rest will autopopulate. You'll then see what you need to do with your engine factories. You can play with airframe production and see how it affects your engine production. (Remove the .txt from the file in order to use it.)

genius ill hack out all the stuff im not building and have me a spreadsheet masterplan - thaks mike - please dont take this post as harrassment or indeed ignorance of your excellent crib sheet which i would always defer to - im just getting things rolling for my self

[Puhis]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek


increasing Bettys to 125 - extra 100 from turn 1
increasing Vals and Kates to 75 each

This sounds a bit too much for me. Are you really going to need that many naval bombers? If you're going to lose 100 bettys per month, you soon don't have enough trained pilots left. Also that kind of factory expansion burn lot of supplies.

I'm going to produce something like 30-40 vals, kates and bettys per month. I'll see if that's too few.

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Here's what I use to estimate engine need. Start with the AirframeProd tab and fill in the yellow cells. The rest will autopopulate. Then go to the Engines tab and fill in the yellow cells. Again, the rest will autopopulate. You'll then see what you need to do with your engine factories. You can play with airframe production and see how it affects your engine production. (Remove the .txt from the file in order to use it.)

genius ill hack out all the stuff im not building and have me a spreadsheet masterplan - thaks mike - please dont take this post as harrassment or indeed ignorance of your excellent crib sheet which i would always defer to - im just getting things rolling for my self

Why would I be upset? I actually started doing an analysis, which I desperately need for my AAR. I'm hoping to start a discussion in the next day or two.

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Here's what I use to estimate engine need. Start with the AirframeProd tab and fill in the yellow cells. The rest will autopopulate. Then go to the Engines tab and fill in the yellow cells. Again, the rest will autopopulate. You'll then see what you need to do with your engine factories. You can play with airframe production and see how it affects your engine production. (Remove the .txt from the file in order to use it.)

genius ill hack out all the stuff im not building and have me a spreadsheet masterplan - thaks mike - please dont take this post as harrassment or indeed ignorance of your excellent crib sheet which i would always defer to - im just getting things rolling for my self

Why would I be upset? I actually started doing an analysis, which I desperately need for my AAR. I'm hoping to start a discussion in the next day or two.

[Mark Weston]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

In an attempt to streamline the emporers crazy production lines im refining the conveyor belts to produce the most effective and most required airframes only to foucus the output and would appreciate any advice on the final few stages having never reached that far in a PBEM:-

Carrier Fighter: A6M2 - A6M3a - A6M5 - then Jack or George
Army Fighter: Nate - Oscar 1c - Tojo - what next?
Carrier Dive Bomber: D3A1 - D3A2 - Judy - Grace
Carrier Torp Bomber: B5N1 - B5N2 - Jill
Sally production to be converted to Lily, Lilys only until the Helen and then the Helen only, with a few Lilys upgrading to the Dive Bomber model
Navy LB Bomber - Nell - Betty - Betty 2 or Frances?

Im working on recon and transport now

thanks for any thoughts

<<edit for recon and patrol and transport>>

im thinking navy - Tina, army - MC21 Sally until Tabby - and Dinah for land recon and its got to be mavis then emily for nav search

Carrier fighters: As already mentioned, George isn't carrier capable. For the carriers the A6M? series is the only game in town, but it might be worth putting some extra research into George even if only for the IJN land based squadrons. There aren't many that can use it, but it is a very nice fighter.

Army Fighter: Long-term aim is definitely to get the Frank in service, also a very nice fighter. At game start I've ramped up Oscar 1c production so as to convert the high-skill army squadrons out of Nate ASAP. What happens between Oscar and Frank I'm not quite sure. Some people seem to feel that Tojo is better than Oscar, I'm not sure whether I'll be aiming for a wholesale switch from Oscar to Tojo or operate both in parallel. Also the Nick looks like it might be a useful interceptor with a very good range. I don't think many units can use it but it may well be worth building a few.

Carrier dive bomber: Judy with the bigger bomb looks very important. The Grace looks cool but I've no idea how the dive/torpedo-bomber hybrid thing works in practice.

Carrier TBs: Nothing to add.

Army bombers: The Lily is terrible, with a tiny bomb-load (I suppose you might be thinking of using it as a DB against shipping, but it won't hurt any ship big enough to care about). As are four or five other army bomber types [:@]. The only worthwhile Dec '41 bomber is the Sally IIa and I've increased production so that front-line units can switch ASAP. In Dec '42 the Helen II turns up with the same bomb-load plus armour and I think that becomes the army bomber for the rest of the war. I have also noticed the existence of the Peggy(T) and do have dreams of building up an army TB force when it arrives.

Navy Bombers: The G3M3 Nell arrives in May '42 with a 4-5 hex range advantage over Betty - which is very useful for search even if the lack of fighter escort makes bombing too risky. I'm also seeing a huge demand for the Ha-32 engine which the Betty uses and the Nell doesn't. So I've expanded Nell production with the aim of slowly switching IJN LB squadrons over. I'll leave Betty in production (no increase) for now to replace early war casualties, and completely switch to Nell by the time of the G3M3 upgrade. The Frances looks nice (an LB that doesn't catch fire as soon as you look at it!) but the P1Y1 has a service rating of 4 which seems completely implausible for sustained combat, and the P1Y2 isn't due until Nov '44.

Army transport: My first thought was an immediate move to MC-21 Sally, but I ran into several situations during the first month when the difference between 10 hexes and 12 hexes was vital. Medium term the 50% load advantage has to be the most important factor, but for the first few months I'm building a few Thalia to keep those units up to strength during the early war expansion.

[Klahn]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek
Now an engine question, if im building 150 zeros a month, this does sound stupid to ask, but is it enough to build 150 HA-35 engines a month for this requirement only? i know my other planes need the same engine im just trying to figure whether 500 airframes a month needs matching to 500 engines a month or does the system work it out differently?

Here is a list of all the planes that use the Ha-35 engine. Your Ha-35 need will change throughout the war as plane types come and go.

I just want to point out that the Tojo didn't use Ha-35 IRL. I noted it as a bug report and hopefully it should get corrected next patch. Tojo used the same engine as the Helen.

[undercovergeek]

i see 2 tojos in sept 42 come on line - is there a difference, do you just build the vanilla one or the 'a' one

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

i see 2 tojos in sept 42 come on line - is there a difference, do you just build the vanilla one or the 'a' one

The "A" for sure ... not sure why there are two variants though avail at the same time...

[undercovergeek]

thanks damian - it does seem a bit odd - i think i pointed a lot of reasearch at vanilla, but only for 1 turn - i will switch to 'a' next turn

[Zeta16]

Once you can bulid the Tojo/tony's over the 43's. At the point the tojo's and such come on line you do not need the range of the 43's which suck in air to air.

[fflaguna]

This was a very helpful thread for me to focus my original starting production!

[sfbaytf]

From the perspective of and allied player I find the Frank the most dangerous aircraft so far when flown my good pilots. Its will give Hellcats and P-38's a very rough time. P-51s and Corsairs also have difficulties. P-47's seem to be the best fighter to take on the Frank.

The Tojo is a very dangerous opponent and will chew up P-38s.

The George is something of a mystery. I rated it as the best fighter I would have to face, but I've changed my mind after playing a campaign game. Its a good fighter, but I think the Frank has done better.

Oscars are more dangerous to those happening to fly them. They are good for allowing allied pilots to run up scores.

The Nick does well in some cases, but in others not so well. Still if I were playing Japan I would build Nicks over Oscars and against 4E allied bombers Nicks are one of the better fighters to use against the heavies.

Haven't faced the Jack enough to have an opinion.

In my estimation the best Allied fighter is the P-47. The Spitfire is a very good airplane to take on Japanese fighters.

The Hellcat isn't the best, but its more than adequate for the task its asked to do.

P-51s have done well, but not as well as I would have expected, but its range makes up for it.

P-38 is very importent when it comes on the scene as a counter to the Zero, but I found it has trouble later on when it encounters advanced Japanese fighters-especially the Frank.

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

From the perspective of and allied player I find the Frank the most dangerous aircraft so far when flown my good pilots. Its will give Hellcats and P-38's a very rough time. P-51s and Corsairs also have difficulties. P-47's seem to be the best fighter to take on the Frank.

The Tojo is a very dangerous opponent and will chew up P-38s.

The George is something of a mystery. I rated it as the best fighter I would have to face, but I've changed my mind after playing a campaign game. Its a good fighter, but I think the Frank has done better.

Oscars are more dangerous to those happening to fly them. They are good for allowing allied pilots to run up scores.

The Nick does well in some cases, but in others not so well. Still if I were playing Japan I would build Nicks over Oscars and against 4E allied bombers Nicks are one of the better fighters to use against the heavies.

Haven't faced the Jack enough to have an opinion.

In my estimation the best Allied fighter is the P-47. The Spitfire is a very good airplane to take on Japanese fighters.

The Hellcat isn't the best, but its more than adequate for the task its asked to do.

P-51s have done well, but not as well as I would have expected, but its range makes up for it.

P-38 is very importent when it comes on the scene as a counter to the Zero, but I found it has trouble later on when it encounters advanced Japanese fighters-especially the Frank.

Thank you for this info. Not many players have gotten that far into the game to judge how these different airframes work out.

Guess I will have to convert some more R&D factories to research Franks. [;)]

[sfbaytf]

The Frank is a very dangerous opponent. I suspect my opponent from the get-go or soon afterwards carefully husbaned his squadrons and made sure to get some of his crack squadrons flying the Oscar or other earlier plane into Franks as quickly as possible. Unlike real life he didn't engage in extended attritional air battles. Some of the Frank squadrons I encountered are/were quite good and gave some of my experienced land based fighters a very bloody nose on more than one occasion.

The only problem is the allieds can send alot more P-47's, P-38's Corsairs and other fighters and just wear them down. You may lose more allied fighters in the first round or 2 of combat against crack squadrons in Franks, but after a 2-3 days of constant combat the allieds if they use their numerical superiority and rotate fighter squadrons to the fray the kill rations begin to swing in the allieds favor and once the crack Japanese pilots start getting shot down its only a matter of time before the overall quality goes down for Japan.

After the fighters comes the B-24s to pound the airbases they are flying from into dust.

I also made it a habbit to send large carrier battlegroups into range of certain areas I knew had concentrations of fighter squadrons and let the Franks, Georges, Zeros and Oscars duke it out with the CAP. The kill rations may not have been in the Hellcats favor, but it wore down the enemy and more importantly it weeded out the weak and gave combat experience to my fighter squadrons on the carriers. Some of my squadrons are finally hitting hte mid to upper 70s in experience.

They'll need it..I've yet to face mass kamikazie attacks and I suspect my opponent is hoarding a boatload for use sometime.

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

I also made it a habbit to send large carrier battlegroups into range of certain areas I knew had concentrations of fighter squadrons and let the Franks, Georges, Zeros and Oscars duke it out with the CAP. The kill rations may not have been in the Hellcats favor, but it wore down the enemy and more importantly it weeded out the weak and gave combat experience to my fighter squadrons on the carriers. Some of my squadrons are finally hitting hte mid to upper 70s in experience.

They'll need it..I've yet to face mass kamikazie attacks and I suspect my opponent is hoarding a boatload for use sometime.

This sounds rather crazy to me. You are wearing down your own pilots this way as well. The darwinian process works for the Japanese as well, after all. Plus, the idea of putting CVs into harm's way just to train up fighter pilots also strikes me as nuts. If you insist on this baptism by fire approach, you could at least disembark the fighter squadrons from the CVs and have them fly out of land bases for the purpose.

[sfbaytf]

I graduated magna cum-laude from the Ghengis Khan school of management

Seriously though, I didn't send in the carriers willy nilly and without some knowledge gained from sparing with land based air what was likely to be at those airbases. After a round or 2 of sparing with the carrier air I retreated the carriers and followed up with land based fight air sweeps and if feasible bombing of the airbases.

I could have flown the Hellcats off of landbases, but they were already packed with aircraft.

All this was done in 44. I wouldn't have done this in 42 or 43.

[Nomad]

excuse me.