Who is he #8 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


1EyedJacks -> Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 2:38:40 PM)

Check this guy out! A most excellent paint job. Do you know his name?


[image]local://upfiles/20162/2BECB2FD2D6649EE83FCF3C7AAD26E66.jpg[/image]




Icedawg -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:02:00 PM)

AV Akitsushima I believe




1EyedJacks -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:13:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

AV Akitsushima I believe


You are absolutely correct!

I found him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_seaplane_tender_Akitsushima




Icedawg -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:19:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

AV Akitsushima I believe


You are absolutely correct!

I found him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_seaplane_tender_Akitsushima


Me too! I wan't 100% sure, so I figured I'd check Wiki to confirm.




Gilbert -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:43:31 PM)

and her TROM is here: http://www.combinedfleet.com/Akitsush.htm




Q-Ball -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:47:08 PM)

The IJN sure wasted alot of shipbuilding resources on things involving seaplanes......




dr.hal -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 3:53:21 PM)

What was the dappling painting suppose to do or represent? Hal




Gunner98 -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 5:18:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

What was the dappling painting suppose to do or represent? Hal


My guess was Arctic camouflage but according to the TROM she went nowhere near the arctic so Idono..

B




Lokasenna -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 5:30:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The IJN sure wasted alot of shipbuilding resources on things involving seaplanes......


I find them very handy to have (faster and easier than sending Av. Support to base those Mavises out on some island), but there are definitely too many of them. I always have spares beyond my spares.




JeffK -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 10:07:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

What was the dappling painting suppose to do or represent? Hal

They've let the Aboriginies get at it for some dot painting!




pws1225 -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/23/2013 10:13:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

What was the dappling painting suppose to do or represent? Hal


Sea gull droppings?




wdolson -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/24/2013 12:24:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The IJN sure wasted alot of shipbuilding resources on things involving seaplanes......


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
I find them very handy to have (faster and easier than sending Av. Support to base those Mavises out on some island), but there are definitely too many of them. I always have spares beyond my spares.


The IJN focused a lot of assets on seaplanes before the war. It's not such a bad idea considering its an island country. There is always water around somewhere. The Dutch also invested a lot in maritime search capability in the DEI.

Nobody thought building airfields on forward bases could be very easy or very quick, so anyone who was seriously thinking about fighting in the Pacific was also thinking about sea planes. The US had several designs that in the end were either built in small numbers or were canceled before production because the US came up with novel ways to build forward airfields fast. Land based aircraft are generally more flexible in mission than sea planes, easier to maintain, and don't sink when you land them with holes in them.

The USN found that modified B-24s and other land based aircraft were more useful than sea planes. They also fell in love with the amphibious version of the PBY (the 5a) when the British preferred the longer range possible from the pure sea plane (the -5).

In the end the USN had less need for seaplane tenders because of all the land bases they and the army built. Japan never had the capacity to build bases like the US did, so they continued to rely on sea plane tenders.

Japanese doctrine also made more use of float planes on ships to serve in the search function and free up carrier bombers for strike. US doctrine was to use dive bombers in the search role. The Tone and Chikuma were built to support the KB and other ships were modified to the sea plane support role later in the war. Aircraft handling on a smaller ship like a cruiser is more difficult than on a carrier. The problems the Tone had launching their float planes at Midway left a gap in a search pattern that was already too thin.

For Japan's construction capabilities, having a lot of sea plane tenders and float plane carriers made some degree of sense. In the end it was flawed compared to what the US did.

Bill




nashvillen -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/24/2013 1:05:52 AM)

Bill, Love the signature block! For anyone wanting confirmation on that, ask any of us who have been "lost" in the vastness of the pacific theatre!




obvert -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/24/2013 1:28:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The IJN sure wasted alot of shipbuilding resources on things involving seaplanes......


I find them very handy to have (faster and easier than sending Av. Support to base those Mavises out on some island), but there are definitely too many of them. I always have spares beyond my spares.


I convert more merchants to AV types than historical! There are a lot of reasons to use these ships and I never have enough of them.

Here is the colorized version of that pic. I have the 1/700 kit as well, and it comes complete with an Emily that could be lifted for repair or transport on the rear deck. This ship is about the length of a Kagero DD but wider and with a square stern.

[image]local://upfiles/37283/0F8E33C2979B414BB1559E09F85CDA7A.jpg[/image]




Lokasenna -> RE: Who is he #8 (2/24/2013 5:32:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The IJN sure wasted alot of shipbuilding resources on things involving seaplanes......


I find them very handy to have (faster and easier than sending Av. Support to base those Mavises out on some island), but there are definitely too many of them. I always have spares beyond my spares.


I convert more merchants to AV types than historical! There are a lot of reasons to use these ships and I never have enough of them.

Here is the colorized version of that pic. I have the 1/700 kit as well, and it comes complete with an Emily that could be lifted for repair or transport on the rear deck. This ship is about the length of a Kagero DD but wider and with a square stern.

[image]local://upfiles/37283/0F8E33C2979B414BB1559E09F85CDA7A.jpg[/image]


I find myself considering conversions to AV (and AR, though not as seriously) whenever the ships are just sitting in port. I think in a PBEM, I would probably use more of them...pair them with a couple of PBs and send them on their way to some forward location, then fly a chutai of float planes for search and you have a relatively inexpensive net of search assets that can be pretty far-flung. Which is nice.

In theory. When I play against the AI, I don't take that kind of time between turns, so I don't actually know if it's possible :P.

I love those colorized photos.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.015625