The Reluctant Admiral

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

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

FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Air Groups

Post by FatR »

Air groups for the Navy are done. In fact, I'm ready to send my work as soon as we solve the weapon question and any other possible questions about the changes.

By the way: the preliminary list of changes for Navy planes:

- No Jack.
- Changes to Zero line, as discussed above. There is a separate line of land-based Zero fighters which get armor, heavier armament and Kinsei engines earlier, at the expense of range and maneurability. Land-based and carrier lines do not convergeAlso, high-altitude performance of Ha-35-powered Zeros is reduced, as in the vanilla Zeros past A6M2 actually performs quite well at higher bands. Also note, that this imposes production difficulties, as the land-based line switches to Mitshubish Ha-33 on 43/1 and the carrier line on 43/8, but engine factories do not upgrade. A6M2's upgrade path goes to A6M5 and so on, Sen Baku -> A6M7 line has its own small plant (with PDU On smart players will probably repurpose it, but with PDU Off a number of late-war airgroups are forced onto these planes).
- D4Y, B6N, G4M lines receive some acceleration, mostly by 1-2 months. G4M2 is accelerated the most, by half a year.
- A7M2 is accelerated to 44/11. A7M3-J appears on 45/4 and 6x20mm-carrying carrier capable A7M3 on 45/9. A7M2 upgrades to A7M3. A7M3-J is not as prominent in the role of the end upgrade of land-based Navy airgroups with PDU off. A7M3 and J6M1 replace it for some units.
- Armored B7A3 is introduced on 45/7.
- Armored D4Y5 is introduced on 45/5. D4Y3 upgrades to D4Y5 and D4Y4 (a purely kamikaze plane in RL) has its own small factory.
- Recon planes and Pete get camera devices.
- G3M4-Q is introduced on 43/4. It eventually gets the H-6 radar and MAD.
- G8N1 Rita is introduced on 45/4. Two units can accept it with PDU Off.
- J6M1 (Ki-83) appears on 45/9. IIRC, three groups have these planes as their end upgrade with PDU Off.
- N1K4-A is introduced on 45/5. It has 2 HMGs+4 20mms and loses to Sam in speed, but wins in maneurability. Two airgroups on carriers conmpleted in summer of 45 come with them.
- Yasukuni (Ki-67-Ib) is available from 44/11. Three aigroups can upgrade to them with PDU Off.
- Minor changes and tweaks (like changing bomb placement on D4Y to "Internal"), as described in the Army planes part, but more numerous.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Air Groups

Post by John 3rd »

Stanislav--Where are you at in the project?  Sounds like you're making solid progress. 
 
Juan--How about you?
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
mikemike
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:26 pm
Location: a maze of twisty little passages, all different

RE: Air Groups

Post by mikemike »

ORIGINAL: FatR

Didn't know about the rimless cartridge. Can you propose any alternative solution? Right now I can think only of adopting some of the Army's twin rifle-caliber MG design as universal.

I found a remark in a book by I.V.Hogg about the development of the Machine Gun. He says that the IJA introduced the 7.7mm cartridge in 1932 in three different versions: rimmed, semi-rimmed, and unrimmed. Now I don't know if all these versions were actually produced in parallel, this would have been another home-made logistical nightmare, considering that the IJA never managed to phase out the 6.5mm weapons. Infantry MGs seem to have used rimmed cartridges, at any rate.

So I see two ways of determining the rifle-calibre MG problem: either assume that there was already a rimless 7.7 cartridge in production and go with a rechambered MG15 copy (disregarding the propensity of Japanese arms engineers to botch such conversions - when they tried to improve on their pre-war Hotchkiss infantry MG they wound up with the Taisho 11 that needed oiled cartridges) or avoid that kind of headache, go with a straight copy of the MG15 and start manufacturing the 7.92X57 cartridge for the Air arm only.

Here are the rifle-caliber MGs actually used by Japan:

Image

Notice that the Army and the Navy used different 7.7mm cartridges; if I interpret the table correctly, the Army had semi-rimmed ammo, and the Navy rimmed cartridges.
The problem is, Type 3 is, supposedly, a rechambered Browning design as well. So, I'm not sure if your table is correct.

Note, though, that at least most HMG-armed Zeros envisioned so far carry all armament in the wings.

Ho-103 instead of Ho-5 needed to be synchronized too and had the same problem.

You're correct, the Ho-103, Ho-5, and the Navy Type 3 were all Browning derivatives, and lost about a third of their ROF by synchronization.

Personally I think the best bet for HMG would have been to push the Navy Type 2, the MG131 copy, as it offered slightly better performance than the Ho-103 and didn't suffer nearly as much as the Brownings from synchronization, an important consideration for the Ki-43, at least. There was a reason why the Ki-43 wasn't switched to a twin Ho-103 armament. Otherwise, don't let anything fire through the propeller.

That also goes for the Oerlikon-derived cannon of the Navy. I think it would have been impossible to synchronize them at all, due to their working principle. When the Fw 190 was armed with the MG FF/M, the cannon were mounted in the outer wing positions exclusively for just that reason.




Attachments
GunCompTable3.jpg
GunCompTable3.jpg (145.75 KiB) Viewed 54 times
DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Air Groups

Post by John 3rd »

FatR--Our Postings crossed in the ether. 
 
Looks like solid, good work.  What was the final decisions/choices regarding the George line?  I see mention above but not too much.  Like the 'clean-up' on device omissions and missed stuff (internal, cameras, etc...).
 
Are there anymore aircraft that you need Red Lancer to work on?
 
MikeMike---Thanks for the research contributions and help on the MG questions...
 
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
mikemike
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:26 pm
Location: a maze of twisty little passages, all different

RE: Air Groups

Post by mikemike »

ORIGINAL: FatR

I know, but in this mod Kinsei is produced in much greater numbers, so that the decision to install it on Ki-61 airframe might be cooked up much earlier.

You mean scrapping the Ki-61-II and going straight to the Ki-100? Technically that would certainly have been possible. I just don't think that it would have occurred to anyone. They already had the Ki-84 in production for medium-altitude operations. The Ki-61-II was intended as the high-altitude fighter in the equipment mix. It was just the failure of the Ha-140 that forced the Army to look for an alternate engine to avoid having several hundred half-finished fighters sitting around. The performance of the Kinsei conversion (pleasantly) surprised everybody, it was, to use the Russian term, a typical frontal fighter. But they still didn't have a high-altitude fighter, because all the effort to build turbosupercharged versions of the Kinsei or other engines didn't result in series production.
DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!
mikemike
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:26 pm
Location: a maze of twisty little passages, all different

RE: Air Groups

Post by mikemike »

Sorry, just noticed: MG 15 clones are of course only for flexible installations, for fixed installation you would have to copy the MG 17 which is related but not identical; it fires faster (about 1000 rpm in a synchronized installation) and can handle belted ammo which the MG 15 couldn't, it used 75-round magazines.

Of course, there is also the MG 81 which was available from 1940, firing 1400-1600 rpm, belted ammo. This was derived from the infantry MG 34 which was notoriously difficult to manufacture, so maybe Japanese factories couldn't have handled the MG 81 satisfactorily.

BTW, found a quote by Tony Williams. He said that the Browning M2, with a normal ROF of 750-850 rpm, was slowed down by synchronization to 400-450 rpm, so my estimate of reduction by a third may well be optimistic. The MG 131 (electrically fired in German service, even in flexible mounts) went down from 900 to 800 rpm.
DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Air Groups

Post by FatR »

Japanese tried to copy MG 17 too, but, apparently, were unable to manufacture springs that could sustain long bursts, so complete switch to 7.92 was hardly possible. (Sigh.) As this mod is limited in scope, I now think that the most plausibe decision that still can benefit IJN in this are is to adopt Army's 7.7x58 catridge and type 98 MG, then attempt to move to HMGs as soon as possible. Type 98/Type 1 offered considerable improvements, but Japanese industry was clearly unable to make enough of them in time. Also, it added one more circle of logistical hell and I want to simplify things whenever possible, so we can have some justification for improvements. Also, twin 7.7 Army's flexible MGs can be used on some planes, particularly two-engine bombers, to boost defences, until a 12.7mm flexible is ready.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Air Groups

Post by FatR »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

FatR--Our Postings crossed in the ether. 

Looks like solid, good work.  What was the final decisions/choices regarding the George line?  I see mention above but not too much. 
N1K1-J (43/7) and N1K2-J (44/8) are as in vanilla. N1K5-J (45/6) uses Mitsubishi Ha-43. Max speed 384, maneuver 27, climb 3110, good high-altitude performance. N1K4-A (45/4) still uses Nakajima Ha-45. Max speed 372, MVR 29, Climb 2730. Both planes carry 2x12.7+4x20mm armament. Earlier models upgrade to N1K5-J.

Also about devices - Nakajima Ha-45 and Mitsubishi Ha-43 are accelerated to 43/7 and 44/11 respectively. Forgot to mention this.



The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Perspective

Post by John 3rd »

That answers the George questions!  Thanks.  I think your 'keep it simple stupid' approach with the MG makes solid sense.  Going with the twin mounts while the industry spins up to create a reliable HMG is a good idea.
 
How do things look from an overall perspective?  Are you reasonably happy with the design/upgrade paths and do you think they match what we talked about in the original Thread?  Certainly SEEMS to but you have the material right in front of you. 
 
This whole thing, in many ways, is going to create a highly different Japanese Naval Force structure in late-42 and 43.  It will be a fresh and unique Mod for people to play along the reasonable 'what if' line of thinking.  The industry will be be retooled, we're adding a few new ships, while taking out a couple, changing the Naval AF, and then some slight modifications to the Naval LCUs should create a different feel that isn't TOO FAR out there (unlike the Juan Mod Michael and I are playing). 
 
I hope we actually get some interest in playing it.  Michael and I are ready to go once this is finished.  Do we have anyone else interested in trying it out when done?
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Juan?

Post by John 3rd »

Mister Juan?  Are you out there Sir?  Haven't heard from you in a few days.  How are things going?
 
Are you trapped under a large pile of paper?  Data?
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
JuanG
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 8:12 pm

RE: Juan?

Post by JuanG »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Mister Juan?  Are you out there Sir?  Haven't heard from you in a few days.  How are things going?

Are you trapped under a large pile of paper?  Data?

Hey,

Sorry for the belated update - I've had a busy week to put it mildly. However, I do have most of the ammo changes done - everything above DE/DD except the Dutch ships and the Japanese DDs. The latter is just a case of not enough time to get them finished, along with slightly conflicting records on their ammo loadouts - the former is a problem as I do not have any ammo data for Dutch ships, so will probably just extrapolate from RN values.

I have made no changes to devices yet as it seems there are others who wish to do so too and dont want to cause duplication - so I will send you the ship class data ASAP (tommorow evening most likely), and then wait for the device changes to be finalised before I make my changes to them.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Juan?

Post by John 3rd »

By devise changes, I assume you mean what Stansilav is taking about?  Do you guys need to exchange files?  Don't want one's worek cancelled by the other!  That would be sad and depressing.
 
FatR---Have you made devise changes by the sounds of it?  Can you contact Juan directly?
 
Juan--Don't worry about those Dutch Stats.  I'll have the ships sunk within days of the war starting! 
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
JuanG
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 8:12 pm

RE: Juan?

Post by JuanG »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

By devise changes, I assume you mean what Stansilav is taking about?  Do you guys need to exchange files?  Don't want one's worek cancelled by the other!  That would be sad and depressing.

FatR---Have you made devise changes by the sounds of it?  Can you contact Juan directly?

Juan--Don't worry about those Dutch Stats.  I'll have the ships sunk within days of the war starting! 

Well, from what I've read on here there are some plans to consolidate some of the aircraft devices and possibly change the caliber of an MG or two? I may be wrong as I've only skim read the last few pages.

My own device changes concern correcting the accuracy values for some of the DP weapons (especially 10cm/65), along with some changes to the Penetration values of larger guns - the values will be roughly what they are in my mod. If you want specifics, just ask.

As said I've not touched the device file yet, and wont have to for now. So I'll just add my bit there when the others have finished with it.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9881
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Juan?

Post by ny59giants »

I'll have the ships sunk within days of the war starting!

Disregard this statement. He was off his medications while at Las Vegas over the weekend.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Juan?

Post by John 3rd »

Medications?  Didn't need any!  I was WELL lubricated....
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Forward Thinking

Post by John 3rd »

Was sitting here looking at Scenario One and starting to put together a 'to do' list for the Mod once everything is finished by FatR and Juan.  This is what I've got so far:

1.  Industry Additions---I know that FatR has gotten engines and aircraft handled so that is taken care of so I'll handle the base size changes, new shipyards, HI, and LI add-ons.  This should be simple and pretty quick.

2.  LCUs---Will go through all the Naval LCUs and add engineers and vehicles as decided in the earlier Thread.  This will be tedious but simple.  Will then add two large new Base Forces, 2 new Air Flotillas, and a new Air Fleet (13th? or 12th?).  These units reflect the increased Japanese training program and preparedness for the war.  They start in the Home Isles and are deployable.

Will also move a few of the deployed units from their traditional starting locations to new areas.

3.  Air Groups---Once Stan is finished, I'll create the new units described in the earlier Thread, change all starting Daitai to appropriate plane model with old planes moved to pools, and see to the CVs starting at full strength in all aircraft.

Will also slightly increased the Naval Air Training Program.

4.  Fleet---Will work on an alternate deployment of the Fleet, move some TF, and place the few new ships that are ready to go due to the Mod. 

Anything I miss???
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
ClaudeJ
Posts: 754
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:38 pm
Location: Bastogne

Shokaku's details

Post by ClaudeJ »

Hello John and gang,

reading this thread with a strong interest, I noticed that the Shokaku's cruise speed and endurance differed from what I'm used to read, though I'm not sure that it does really matter or isn't simply a concession to the game's mechanics.

Anyway, I took a look at my books and one of my favorite source about Japanese carriers, "Samouraï sur porte-avions" by Michel Ledet (because it's based on actual Japanese archives), quote, for the Shokaku, 9700 nm at 18 knots, then (not sure when is "then" though) 12251 nm.

The Zuikaku is quoted at the same base endurance and "then" at 11789 nm.

About the Fuel load, Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1922-1946 quote 4100t of Oil (not sure if it's exactly equal to Fuel).

The same reference also quote, about the Armor, a maximum thickness on the deck of 129.54 millimeters (5.1 inch) for the magazines, the machinery being protected by 99.06 millimeters (3.9 inch) of armor.

Now, the deck itself wasn't armored so I'm not sure how to handle it.

Cheers and keep up the good work!
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4 Go, Windows 10 64bits, 32 GB RAM, Regional settings = French, Belgium
(Previously known as JanMasters0n)
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Shokaku's details

Post by John 3rd »

Hello Jan!  I wrote you back through email.  Did you not get the note?
 
We chose to slow the CV's speed due to increased tonnage with no boost in engine power.  Will check the endurance thought.  I THINK the armor is correct with the initial Sho/Zui.  Will have to check that and make sure.
 
Greatly appreciate the thoughts and contribution. 
 
Got any more?
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
ClaudeJ
Posts: 754
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:38 pm
Location: Bastogne

RE: Shokaku's details

Post by ClaudeJ »

Hello John,

the email was probably flushed out along the metric ton of spams I receive daily, sorry.

The speed I was referring to is the Cruise speed which is 15 knots in the official DB. However, since it seems to be an across the board standard cruise speed, it may be a founded variation from the references.

The reduced Max speed of your Shokaku-kai looks judicious to me too.

I don't have any more remarks for now but I could check the Fuel loads or similar details if it can help.



Edit: about the Naval Air Training Program, in the book "Zero" Masatake Okumiya explain that when he became instructor at the Kasumigaura Aviation Corps in January 1940, the Tai-i Takekastu Tanaka suggested a plan for the training of 15 000 pilots. This plan was rejected by their hierarchy because it was such disproportionate with the usual planning.

However, in August 1941 the IJN planned the training of 15 000 pilots per year, a plan that won't produce result until two or four year later as Okumiya estimated.


Also, though I'm not sure it could be relevant in WITP, he does also write that during the training for the invasion of SRA, the best IJN's strategist and pilots were gathered at Formosa, where they worked hard to improve their plan and focused on the endurance of their Zero. Eventually they were able to fly it for 12 hours, lowering their fuel consumption to 80 liters per hour, Saburo Sakai reaching figure as low as 68 liters per hour.

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4 Go, Windows 10 64bits, 32 GB RAM, Regional settings = French, Belgium
(Previously known as JanMasters0n)
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Shokaku's details

Post by John 3rd »

We're probably good since the only really NEW ships are the two BC.  Everything else is simply follow-on ships of an established class.
 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”