CV complement?

[Dili]

How much anyone deals with CV complement. Fill them to the top from start?

I was reading Midway order of battle and was surprised how both sides were low specially the Japanese.

US was around 77 planes per CV.

Japan 74 for Kaga, 60! for Akagi, 57 for Hiryu and Soryu, all this included 21 land based Zeros.


Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_order_of_battle

[Korvar]

Historically, the numbers are what one would expect and are even higher (USN) than usual - the carrier air group 'standard' complements at the time were as follows:

IJN:
21 Mitsubishi A6M 'Zero' Fighters
21 Aichi D3A 'Val' Dive-bombers
21 Nakajima B2N 'Kate' Torpedo-bombers

63 Total aircraft

Keep in mind that Kaga was a lot larger than Hiryu and Soryu - that's why they're a little low and Kaga's complement is 'oversized' compared to standard.


USN:
18 Grumman F4F Fighters (VF fighter squadron)
18 Douglas SBD Dive-bombers (VB dive-bomber 'attack' squadron)
18 Douglas SBD Dive-bombers (VS scouting squadron)
18 Douglas TBD Torpedo-bombers (VT torpedo 'attack' squadron)

72 total aircraft


The key difference in composition is that the IJN emphasized attack above all else, while the USN balanced the attack mission with scouting. This was intentional doctrine, as the USN knew the primary role for the carriers was to find and destroy enemy carriers. Wargaming with the Lexingtons in the '30s had proven to the USN that the side to discover their enemy first usually prevailed, as air attacks on carriers had a good chance to eliminate the possibility of counter attack. As a result, the SBD had been specifically designed to be both a good dive-bomber and scout, doctrine prescribed dedicated squadrons for each mission, and thus the VB and VS squadrons emphasized different missions but were used interchangeably for both as the need arose.

Torpedo planes were only there to attack battleships, as bombs were enough to damage but typically not sink a heavily armored target; otherwise, another SBD squadron would have taken the place of the TBDs. Keep in mind that many officers of both the IJN and USN thought that battleships were still the decisive force in a war, until the IJN advanced the USN to carrier-centric doctrine on Dec 7th.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Dili

How much anyone deals with CV complement. Fill them to the top from start?

I was reading Midway order of battle and was surprised how both sides were low specially the Japanese.

US was around 77 planes per CV.

Japan 74 for Kaga, 60! for Akagi, 57 for Hiryu and Soryu, all this included 21 land based Zeros.


Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_order_of_battle

Japanese industry was just not producing enough vals and kates to replace the losses of the early 1942 expansion. A lot of Japanese air units were worn out and under strength from constant action. If you look at the Allied replacement rates for around the battle of Midway in your game, you can understand the shortage of aircraft as well. As it was they had to scavenge a lot of Marine units to find more carrier fighters-leaving not quite a few of them stuck with Buffalos for a while longer.

One reason I try to avoid major carrier fights in 1942 is that win or lose it generally leaves my Allied carriers depleted of aircraft for months.

[BBfanboy]

I think both sides also underestimated the ease with which bombers could penetrate CAP - later in the war the US put more fighters on their carriers and carried fewer DBs. I don't think the Japanese ever got enough fighters and trained pilots to increase their carrier complements much.

[geofflambert]

I never fail to complement any CV. CVLs not so much and CVEs not at all. I tell her how great her stern looks from behind. Stuff like that.

[scout1]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I never fail to complement any CV. CVLs not so much and CVEs not at all. I tell her how great her stern looks from behind. Stuff like that.

And how has that worked out for you ?

[geofflambert]

Usually, I just get brined in the face. One time, though, she let me grope her bilges. None of my friends ever got that far.

[BBfanboy]

Were those bilges freshly steam cleaned, or do gorns not care about such niceties?
How did you get past the arrester wires?

[geofflambert]

The dirtier the better. The arrester wires? Just give them a donut.

[oaltinyay]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I never fail to complement any CV. CVLs not so much and CVEs not at all. I tell her how great her stern looks from behind. Stuff like that.

Does it work ? Extra missions ? More ammo in the mags ?

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: oaltinyay

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I never fail to complement any CV. CVLs not so much and CVEs not at all. I tell her how great her stern looks from behind. Stuff like that.

Does it work ? Extra missions ? More ammo in the mags ?

Not without Viagra. I'm getting old, one mission is about it. Again, I'm getting old and it's not clear if my ammo is live.

[ny59giants]

For my American CVs, I place an 18 plane Marine fighter group on them ASAP. I want better "survivabilty" for '42. I sleep better having 45 fighters per CV. Once the fighter groups expand to 36 plane on July 1st, I take off my TBs (Avengers) and maybe divide them. So, I'm now up to 54 fighters and 36 DBs = 90 planes. I can now put on a small 5th group that can be a few CV capable recon or a few TBs and still below 99 planes.

Japan was short of Vals and Kates at Midway since they ran into problems with both their replacements - Judy and Jill that were to be in production by mid-42.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

For my American CVs, I place an 18 plane Marine fighter group on them ASAP. I want better "survivabilty" for '42. I sleep better having 45 fighters per CV. Once the fighter groups expand to 36 plane on July 1st, I take off my TBs (Avengers) and maybe divide them. So, I'm now up to 54 fighters and 36 DBs = 90 planes. I can now put on a small 5th group that can be a few CV capable recon or a few TBs and still below 99 planes.

Japan was short of Vals and Kates at Midway since they ran into problems with both their replacements - Judy and Jill that were to be in production by mid-42.

My understanding is that they deliberately ramped down production of vals in expectation of the new Judys coming on line and the delays left a large gap.

[geofflambert]

I agree that at least 50% of planes should be fighters (either side) and if you can put two sqds. on with one dedicated to CAP and the other doing CAP and Escort, I'd recommend doing that as well.

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

For my American CVs, I place an 18 plane Marine fighter group on them ASAP. I want better "survivabilty" for '42. I sleep better having 45 fighters per CV. Once the fighter groups expand to 36 plane on July 1st, I take off my TBs (Avengers) and maybe divide them. So, I'm now up to 54 fighters and 36 DBs = 90 planes. I can now put on a small 5th group that can be a few CV capable recon or a few TBs and still below 99 planes.

Japan was short of Vals and Kates at Midway since they ran into problems with both their replacements - Judy and Jill that were to be in production by mid-42.

My understanding is that they deliberately ramped down production of vals in expectation of the new Judys coming on line and the delays left a large gap.

+1

I am indeed learning /learned this as the best practice reading the AARs.

Even a Buffalo VMF squad can make a difference.

I hadn't considered phase 2 once the fighter squadrons resize. i.e. removing the TB Avengers.

This also sounds like very good advice albeit I guess the cost is RECOM.

The Avengers have been performing 2ndary mission Recon and at least against the AI they have been very effective.

Good defense / offense is also knowing when to fight and when to run away

[Dili]

Thanks everyone.

I think it was the B5N2 that had production stopped.

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

My understanding is that they deliberately ramped down production of vals in expectation of the new Judys coming on line and the delays left a large gap.

My opinion and practice are to be very careful about reducing, let alone eliminating, soon (hopefully) to be obsolete aircraft. Until the next model in line is in full production, and you are successfully converting squadrons, do not cease production of the older model. Rather reduce it as you are able, by converting one factory at a time, just make sure units still using the old model are fully supported with replacements. Any planes left over will make excellent trainers, ASW planes around major ports and, in the end Kamikaze aircraft. Do not make a judgement error in the wrong direction. Once you have converted one squadron to the new model and shown you are producing sufficient replacement aircraft for the squadrons using it, and producing a sufficient surplus to convert more squadrons, maintain your production of the old model.

edit: another consideration is how many engines you've built of the relevant type. Normally, but not in all cases, I would say it would be foolish not to build the most useful plane that requires engines you have in inventory, until that inventory is exhausted or nearly exhausted.

[Encircled]

In my last game, I was down to six A6M2 in the pool, and had only just changed the Hiryu component to A6M3a.

I was being very, very, very careful with my production (PDU off) but I think I cut it just a bit too fine.

My opponent quit thankfully!

[geofflambert]

In that case it is not a question of when to convert a factory (so much) as the A6M2 doesn't lead to the A6M3a. There's absolutely no excuse for premature discontinuation of the A6M2. It's quite possible that you'd be glad to have them in '44.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Thanks everyone.

I think it was the B5N2 that had production stopped.

It was. That's why the scen 1 starts with no Kate production. You have to build a factory from scratch.