Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager unveils its multiplayer modes Another update for Commander: The Great War!Distant Worlds: Universe gets a new updateDeal of the Week: Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich Advanced Tactics Gold is coming to SteamMatrix Games now speaks German!A little bit of history with To End All WarsBattle Academy 2 gets a release date!Reinforcements on the Frontline!New shipping cost for European territories!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The battle for Lautem

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The battle for Lautem Page: <<   < prev  105 106 [107] 108 109   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/21/2013 6:24:09 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Me and QBall agreed to avoid night bombing anywhere but in the HI. That's because we both think Night warfare is "borked".
However, considering how important it was for the allies in RL to destroy Japan we've agreed to allow it over Japan so not to completely change the game final outcome.

So, to destroy my oil centers he must: 1) be in range of fighter sweeps/escort or 2) use more aggressively his subs (a thing that he's doing a lot lately).

About my next defensive line... well, the problem is that I don't have much more units to send there, nor the PPs to buy anything at the moment. The need to defend Burma and Sumatra deeply have severly reduced my ability to deploy large concentrations of troops in the upper DEI.

Am trying to lift out some of my INF units stuck behind enemy lines... but it simply takes too much time...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3181
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/21/2013 6:57:31 PM   
obvert


Posts: 6957
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Me and QBall agreed to avoid night bombing anywhere but in the HI. That's because we both think Night warfare is "borked".
However, considering how important it was for the allies in RL to destroy Japan we've agreed to allow it over Japan so not to completely change the game final outcome.

So, to destroy my oil centers he must: 1) be in range of fighter sweeps/escort or 2) use more aggressively his subs (a thing that he's doing a lot lately).

About my next defensive line... well, the problem is that I don't have much more units to send there, nor the PPs to buy anything at the moment. The need to defend Burma and Sumatra deeply have severly reduced my ability to deploy large concentrations of troops in the upper DEI.

Am trying to lift out some of my INF units stuck behind enemy lines... but it simply takes too much time...



This was my issue in the Moluccas. I had to just give ground for a while as more troops arrived and were purchased. Look for the creative combinations too. Some of the garrison forces even combine into divisions later, and of course the brigades from China can do so as well.

You can still build and chose which will be the hard points, and knowing this may help in how you steer you defense for the next few months.

If he can't bomb the DEI oil at all then you're sitting pretty. I know the feelings on night bombing, and I remember what you had decided, but even in the DEI the Allies used B-29s and raided at night, as much as it might kill off a bunch of points very quickly, it's hard to decide after the B-29s come to limit the strategic stuff. It also gives you a free ride on supply production with the HI/LI all over the DEI, whereas in my game that was simply gone by mid-44. Should make for a longer more intense game, but I worry Q might get frustrated with those limitations at some point. Maybe not. Maybe he'll just use them to obliterate your airfields one by one and hit you behind the lines where you can hardly believe he has the range to do it.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3182
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 12:05:56 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12108
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

The Utah was lost at Pearl Harbor and is still there, though it was a decommissoned Battleship turned into a target veesel. It's memorial is on the ooposite side of Ford Island from the Azirona's.



Utah was in CHS and regularly took a few torps per test attack. Never understood why AE decided against it's inclusion. Blah, blah, Alton (ex AC Chicago) was there, no way to stop inboard or drydocked ships from being torped, what if it survived the attack? I know. schedule its' withdrawl Jan 42 or somesuch!

Great game GJ

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 3183
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 9:26:01 AM   
Commander Cody


Posts: 852
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
Regarding ports, although it's great to have a nice, big port, the Allies can use naval support, shore parties, AKEs, AEs and sundry other support vessels to simulate a big port in a couple-three key locations. So, while those big ports and air fields should be well defended, don't be surprised if some smaller bases start supporting big operations.

EDIT: Also, this mod has all kinds of Allied ARDs, which make getting a repair-capable port less necessary for the Allies (in real life I doubt any recaptured ports were capable of big repairs anyway, but that's another discussion).

Cheers,
CC

< Message edited by Commander Cody -- 10/22/2013 9:31:26 AM >


_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 3184
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 5:07:58 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7109
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I don´t think a big harbour is that important. He can unload at Darwin/Manus (6/7) and then just shuttle it forward using LST. I´m currently sustaining half the allied advance from a level 4 port. Naval support is of course a big factor but its no problem.

What he really needs is a level 9 AF to base the 4Es at. There arn´t many in the area. Manado and Timor are the only one I think?



Once again it is not so much the port size as you can amass a sufficient number of size 6 and 7 ports but it is the shipyards. You got to have them once you get into the inevitable major fights. Taking major fleet damage in the DEI means that you have to send cripples to Sidney. (not big enough) or make the long trip to Pearl or the West Coast of the USA. Likewise Colombo is not a very big ship yard and the only other choice in SE Asia is Capetown.

If you end up fighting near Japan and start eating kamikazes with no local ship yard available it just blows. The yard has to be big enough to repair numerous CAs, DDs and attack transport while fixing bigger ships enough to get them home safely. There are only really three possibilities. Singapore, Hong Kong and Manila. The Allied player simply has to take one of these three-two of them is better. An attack through the Southern DEI is not a bad way to go but it limits your options and the Allied player needs to plan accordingly.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3185
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 6:52:29 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4732
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Once again it is not so much the port size as you can amass a sufficient number of size 6 and 7 ports but it is the shipyards. You got to have them once you get into the inevitable major fights. Taking major fleet damage in the DEI means that you have to send cripples to Sidney. (not big enough) or make the long trip to Pearl or the West Coast of the USA. Likewise Colombo is not a very big ship yard and the only other choice in SE Asia is Capetown.

If you end up fighting near Japan and start eating kamikazes with no local ship yard available it just blows. The yard has to be big enough to repair numerous CAs, DDs and attack transport while fixing bigger ships enough to get them home safely. There are only really three possibilities. Singapore, Hong Kong and Manila. The Allied player simply has to take one of these three-two of them is better. An attack through the Southern DEI is not a bad way to go but it limits your options and the Allied player needs to plan accordingly.


If the CENTPAC route is open it not insanely far to PH. But I agree. Having a repair yard locally is of course gold!

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3186
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 9:39:06 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2640
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Once again it is not so much the port size as you can amass a sufficient number of size 6 and 7 ports but it is the shipyards. You got to have them once you get into the inevitable major fights. Taking major fleet damage in the DEI means that you have to send cripples to Sidney. (not big enough) or make the long trip to Pearl or the West Coast of the USA. Likewise Colombo is not a very big ship yard and the only other choice in SE Asia is Capetown.

If you end up fighting near Japan and start eating kamikazes with no local ship yard available it just blows. The yard has to be big enough to repair numerous CAs, DDs and attack transport while fixing bigger ships enough to get them home safely. There are only really three possibilities. Singapore, Hong Kong and Manila. The Allied player simply has to take one of these three-two of them is better. An attack through the Southern DEI is not a bad way to go but it limits your options and the Allied player needs to plan accordingly.


If the CENTPAC route is open it not insanely far to PH. But I agree. Having a repair yard locally is of course gold!



Idunno, at a speed of 2/1 or 1/0, going from Luzon to Hawaii is a long way. Plus, if it's a major asset and I were Japan, I'd be littering the route(s) with subs.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3187
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 9:46:00 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4732
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Idunno, at a speed of 2/1 or 1/0, going from Luzon to Hawaii is a long way. Plus, if it's a major asset and I were Japan, I'd be littering the route(s) with subs.


You can repair both SYS and FLT (using ARDs) locally so I think its not too common having to make the entire journey with 1 hex per phase.

But again. Having a repair yard available is of course nice!

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 3188
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 10:31:31 PM   
obvert


Posts: 6957
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I don´t think a big harbour is that important. He can unload at Darwin/Manus (6/7) and then just shuttle it forward using LST. I´m currently sustaining half the allied advance from a level 4 port. Naval support is of course a big factor but its no problem.

What he really needs is a level 9 AF to base the 4Es at. There arn´t many in the area. Manado and Timor are the only one I think?



Once again it is not so much the port size as you can amass a sufficient number of size 6 and 7 ports but it is the shipyards. You got to have them once you get into the inevitable major fights. Taking major fleet damage in the DEI means that you have to send cripples to Sidney. (not big enough) or make the long trip to Pearl or the West Coast of the USA. Likewise Colombo is not a very big ship yard and the only other choice in SE Asia is Capetown.

If you end up fighting near Japan and start eating kamikazes with no local ship yard available it just blows. The yard has to be big enough to repair numerous CAs, DDs and attack transport while fixing bigger ships enough to get them home safely. There are only really three possibilities. Singapore, Hong Kong and Manila. The Allied player simply has to take one of these three-two of them is better. An attack through the Southern DEI is not a bad way to go but it limits your options and the Allied player needs to plan accordingly.


Can't you just build up a smaller repair yard too? Soerbaja would do after a month of building it up. Or Saigon.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3189
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 11:58:17 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2640
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I don´t think a big harbour is that important. He can unload at Darwin/Manus (6/7) and then just shuttle it forward using LST. I´m currently sustaining half the allied advance from a level 4 port. Naval support is of course a big factor but its no problem.

What he really needs is a level 9 AF to base the 4Es at. There arn´t many in the area. Manado and Timor are the only one I think?



Once again it is not so much the port size as you can amass a sufficient number of size 6 and 7 ports but it is the shipyards. You got to have them once you get into the inevitable major fights. Taking major fleet damage in the DEI means that you have to send cripples to Sidney. (not big enough) or make the long trip to Pearl or the West Coast of the USA. Likewise Colombo is not a very big ship yard and the only other choice in SE Asia is Capetown.

If you end up fighting near Japan and start eating kamikazes with no local ship yard available it just blows. The yard has to be big enough to repair numerous CAs, DDs and attack transport while fixing bigger ships enough to get them home safely. There are only really three possibilities. Singapore, Hong Kong and Manila. The Allied player simply has to take one of these three-two of them is better. An attack through the Southern DEI is not a bad way to go but it limits your options and the Allied player needs to plan accordingly.


Can't you just build up a smaller repair yard too? Soerbaja would do after a month of building it up. Or Saigon.


The Allies do not have this option, so as Japan it is important to choose which forward repair yards you will increase, if any.

Not increasing the size of the Manila yard could really hurt the Allies, I think.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 3190
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/22/2013 11:59:50 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2640
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Idunno, at a speed of 2/1 or 1/0, going from Luzon to Hawaii is a long way. Plus, if it's a major asset and I were Japan, I'd be littering the route(s) with subs.


You can repair both SYS and FLT (using ARDs) locally so I think its not too common having to make the entire journey with 1 hex per phase.

But again. Having a repair yard available is of course nice!


I suppose the Allied ARDs do have a large capacity... Still, they can't handle more than a few ships at a time, right? Let's say you have a large engagement near Luzon or even Mindanao and you end up with several ships with 50-80 Flt damage, almost all of it major. ARDs alone can't handle that. I think that's crsutton's point. You really do "need" a yard.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3191
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/23/2013 7:44:18 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Great thoughts guys!

Unfortunately, i can't really do much at the moment... the line is already crumbling and the waters in the Mollucces are already flooded with Fletchers...impossible to hit by air and deadly with their raids against anything that moves... I really screwed up my defensive plan. Never thought i could be so short with ships... i'm losing the grip

Feb 20, 1943

The enemy CVs advance and reach Damar... east of Lautem... while the air bombings continue (everything in reach is bombed and destroyed), i tried to move out what was left of my mini-KB from Kendari (too Dangerous with all those subs)... 2 CVEs escorted by 4 Kageros...... at Menado...at night...an unseen enemy TF (4Fletchers) engagé and damage my 2 flattops... then a sub places 2 fishes in the Kyiko's belly...sinking her for good... one more CVE lost and one badly damaged (probably will sink Tomorrow)... oh well....

Now the movements between Kendari and Menado are interdicted.... and all the waters around Menado are enslaved to the Fletcher's reign... they can bomb my AF, they can raid my sealines...and i have basically nothing to oppose them

Getting harder everyday

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 3192
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/23/2013 8:39:16 PM   
leehunt27@bloomberg.net


Posts: 415
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline
Don't lose hope GreyJoy-- its 1944 and he has a long, long way to go. How many grinding atolls, fortifications, and kamikazes has he yet to face?

_____________________________

John 21:25

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3193
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/23/2013 11:14:10 PM   
obvert


Posts: 6957
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online
Fletchers are a bane, for sure, but they can't take a base.

How is your supply? Can you front load some of the next line of defense so they're more or less good for a few months, thus making sure he can't cut you off at sea and leave your guys starving?

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to leehunt27@bloomberg.net)
Post #: 3194
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/25/2013 5:41:39 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7109
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Idunno, at a speed of 2/1 or 1/0, going from Luzon to Hawaii is a long way. Plus, if it's a major asset and I were Japan, I'd be littering the route(s) with subs.


You can repair both SYS and FLT (using ARDs) locally so I think its not too common having to make the entire journey with 1 hex per phase.

But again. Having a repair yard available is of course nice!


Yes, but it really is more a function of time. A severely damaged carrier is going to be out of work 4-6 months and a BB can take up to a year to repair. If you can cut two months time off transit not to mention the time spent getting sys and temp. flotation damage down then you are better off. If you have a dozen severely damaged capital ships then a good shipyard will make a very big difference. Believe me, this is the voice of experience talking here...

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3195
RE: The battle for Lautem - 10/25/2013 5:48:28 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4732
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I believe you!

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3196
DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 10:11:16 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
So guys, the time has come. The KB has finally failed. At the 5th Carrier engagement of the war, the allies finally managed to take the upper hand. Luck, flak and radar were all on their side this time.

What happened?

Feb 20, 44


As you may remember Yesterday we spotted the enemy's CVs near Damar moving North. Didn't see any invasion force so i thought it was a supporting/raiding mission. I decided to take this opportunity to cause a bit of havoc among the series of TFs moving east/west North of ambon, through all those little bases recently conquered by the enemy's paras.
Moved my combined fleet 1 hex east of Kendari. The CVTFs were ordered to follow an ASW TF and several SCTFs (with BBs and CAs).
Unfortunately this time i was wrong. Brad was actually invading Namlea so he moved his CVs 2 hexes south of Ambon...
During the morning severe storms obscured both fleets, but when the afternoon arrived, my search planes spotted them and my admirals (Nagumo, Yamaguchi and Abe) decided to react towards the enemy,
leaving all the BBs and CAs back...so abbandoning the flak cover...
The enemy reacted too and we anded up pretty close to each other...
Another thing that changed the outcome was that my stupid generals decided to attack first a CVETF 3 hexes east of the American CVs... We sunk 5 or 6 of them, but our major punch
lost its unity...and when it was time to attack the real target (CVs) we were badly outnumbered...
The Bunker Hill, the Intrepid and the CVL cabot are for sure out of the war for some months...but the attack wasn't good at all... there was bad weather over the enemy's CVs and that put surely out of aim my torpedo bombers
Also the Hellcats did a great job concentrating almost immediately on my bombers....
Then the counterstrike arrived... and it was a massacre.
The Zuiho sunk, the Ryuho and Ryuhio are dead in the water.
The Katsuragi has 60 fires and will surely be gone.
The Junyo will sink tomorrow (doing 2 knots).
Many more units have fires and damage that will put them out of the war for months (if i can save them, which isn't sure considering the number of subs around).
A disaster...yes.
The enemy's flak was really a factor and so was the reaction... but i cannot complain. Bad decisions on my part and Brad deserved some luck after all this time.

The enemy landed a full supported marine division at Namlea, thus isolating Ambon and Boela for good.
Now the door of the DEI is open. The guardian (KB) is no more and Japan's fate is written.

Long live the Emperor!




AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Feb 20, 44

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Truk at 112,108

Japanese Ships
AM Wa 104, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
AM Wa 103

Allied Ships
SS S-44



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Ambon at 76,110

Japanese Ships
SS I-154, hits 16, and is sunk

Allied Ships
DD Caperton
CLAA Oakland
DD Dortch
DD Claxton
CA Quincy

SS I-154 launches 2 torpedoes at DD Caperton
I-154 diving deep ....
DD Dortch attacking submerged sub ....
SS I-154 forced to surface!
DD Dortch firing on surfaced sub ....
DD Claxton firing on surfaced sub ....
CA Quincy firing on surfaced sub ....
Sub slips beneath the waves


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Obi , at 77,106

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 13 NM, estimated altitude 36,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 3 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-84r Frank x 24

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 10
FM-1 Wildcat x 23
F6F-3 Hellcat x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-84r Frank: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 5 destroyed
FM-1 Wildcat: 8 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 3 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x Ki-84r Frank sweeping at 34000 feet *

CAP engaged:
VC(F)-39 with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(10 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 10 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
VC(F)-41 with FM-1 Wildcat (13 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(13 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
13 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
VF-60 with F4F-4 Wildcat (10 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(10 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
10 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
VC(F)-68 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(10 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 10 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Namlea at 76,108 (From Kendari)

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 62 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 27
P1Y2 Frances x 12

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 4
P-38H Lightning x 8
P-40K Warhawk x 11
FM-1 Wildcat x 33
F6F-3 Hellcat x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 5 destroyed
P1Y2 Frances: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
FM-1 Wildcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
KV Freesia
APA Calvert
APD Manley

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x P1Y2 Frances launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Obi at 77,106

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 105 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 12
D4Y3 Judy x 6
N1K2-J George x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y3 Judy: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
xAK Frederick Billings, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
xAK George L. Curry, heavy fires

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x D4Y3 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y3 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK George L. Curry


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Ambon at 75,109 (again from Kendari<)

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 112 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 33 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 15
D4Y3 Judy x 13
N1K2-J George x 4
P1Y2 Frances x 12

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 6
P-38H Lightning x 10
P-40K Warhawk x 17
F4F-4 Wildcat x 8
FM-1 Wildcat x 66
F4U-1A Corsair x 80
F6F-3 Hellcat x 164

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 3 destroyed
D4Y3 Judy: 3 destroyed
P1Y2 Frances: 8 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
FM-1 Wildcat: 1 destroyed

C

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Ambon at 77,111

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 26 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 27
B6N2 Jill x 67
B7A2 Grace x 18

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 13
FM-1 Wildcat x 41
F6F-3 Hellcat x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 5 destroyed
B6N2 Jill: 23 destroyed, 6 damaged
B7A2 Grace: 3 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 2 destroyed
FM-1 Wildcat: 6 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVE White Plains, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
CVE Kasaan Bay, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CVE Fanshaw Bay, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CVE Kalinin Bay, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
CVE Gambier Bay, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CVE Kitkun Bay, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
DE Stadtfeld
DE Tisdale

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
9 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
12 x B7A2 Grace launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
10 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

CAP engaged:
VF-9 with F6F-3 Hellcat (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(6 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
5 planes vectored on to bombers
VC(F)-41 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(4 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
VC(F)-39 with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 6 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
8 planes vectored on to bombers
VF-60 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 7 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 21000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 40 minutes
5 planes vectored on to bombers
VC(F)-68 with FM-1 Wildcat (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 6 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
2 planes vectored on to bombers
VC(F)-3 with FM-1 Wildcat (2 airborne, 6 on standby, 9 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes
17 planes vectored on to bombers
VC(F)-5 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 14000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 10 minutes

Fuel storage explosion on CVE White Plains
Ammo storage explosion on CVE Kasaan Bay
Fuel storage explosion on CVE Fanshaw Bay
Fuel storage explosion on CVE Gambier Bay
Ammo storage explosion on CVE Kitkun Bay
Ammo storage explosion on CVE White Plains


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Ambon at 75,109

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 119 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 35 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 128
B5N2 Kate x 22
B6N2 Jill x 121
B7A2 Grace x 12
D4Y4 Judy x 187

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 4
P-38H Lightning x 10
P-40K Warhawk x 14
F4F-4 Wildcat x 6
FM-1 Wildcat x 54
F4U-1A Corsair x 77
F6F-3 Hellcat x 152

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 9 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 19 destroyed, 13 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 1 destroyed by flak
B7A2 Grace: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
D4Y4 Judy: 21 destroyed, 21 damaged
D4Y4 Judy: 14 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1A Corsair: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVL Monterey, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CV Essex
CVL Cowpens
CV Bunker Hill, Bomb hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVL Cabot, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Astoria
CV Intrepid, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
CVL Langley, Torpedo hits 1
CV Yorktown
CA Portland
DD Stembel
CLAA San Juan, Bomb hits 1
DD Lewis Hancock
DD Healy, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
8 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
3 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
8 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
10 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
19 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
8 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
11 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
6 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
1 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
10 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
4 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
7 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
12 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
8 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
2 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
11 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
8 x B7A2 Grace launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
19 x B5N2 Kate bombing from 14000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
8 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
3 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
6 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
3 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
7 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
3 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
4 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb
4 x D4Y4 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 800 kg AP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VF-2 with F4U-1A Corsair (4 airborne, 17 on standby, 12 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 37 minutes
VF-3 with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 8 on standby, 8 scrambling)
5 plane(s) not yet engaged, 14 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
VF-42 with F6F-3 Hellcat (1 airborne, 5 on standby, 8 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 13 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 1000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
VF-18 with F4U-1A Corsair (5 airborne, 8 on standby, 8 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
8 plane(s) not yet engaged, 10 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 29 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
VF-22 with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 40 minutes
VF-24 with F6F-3 Hellcat (3 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 14000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
VC(F)-39 with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes
VC(F)-41 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
7 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 14645.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes
VF-60 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes
VC(F)-68 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 55 minutes
VOC(F)-1 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 14 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes
VC(F)-3 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
VC(F)-5 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10645.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 48 minutes
VC(F)-10 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 6 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 38 minutes
VRF-5F with F6F-3 Hellcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes
VMF-115 with FM-1 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 1 minutes
No.457 Sqn RAF with Spitfire Vc Trop (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 13 minutes
49th FG/7th FS with P-38H Lightning (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 10 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 38 minutes
18th FG/12th FS with P-40K Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 8 minutes
475th FG/431st FS with P-40K Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 8 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 5 minutes

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CVL Cabot
Ammo storage explosion on CV Intrepid
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Intrepid
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Bunker Hill


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kendari at 71,107

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 197
A6M5b Zero x 54
A6M5c Zero x 27
N1K2-J George x 5
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 4

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 113
SB2C-1C Helldiver x 62
SBD-5 Dauntless x 30
TBF-1 Avenger x 82
TBM-1C Avenger x 64

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 4 destroyed
A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 11 destroyed
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 18 destroyed, 8 damaged
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 1 destroyed by flak
SBD-5 Dauntless: 9 destroyed, 4 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 15 destroyed, 15 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak
TBM-1C Avenger: 19 destroyed, 8 damaged
TBM-1C Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
CV Amagi
CV Zuikaku
CVL Ryujo, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CV Shokaku, Torpedo hits 1
CV Katsuragi, Bomb hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
CVL Zuiho, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
CV Soryu
CVL Ryuho, Torpedo hits 3, heavy damage
CV Hiryu, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CVE Unyo, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires
CV Junyo, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CV Kaga
CVL Shoho, Bomb hits 3, on fire
BB Kongo, Torpedo hits 1
DD Wakaba, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Kawakaze
DD Myojinkaze

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
10 x TBM-1C Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
13 x TBM-1C Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
12 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
9 x TBM-1C Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
9 x TBM-1C Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
12 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
10 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
14 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
9 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
3 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
5 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
7 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
4 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
3 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
5 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
1 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Yokosuka Ku S-2 with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 31000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes
Akagi-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 24 on standby, 0 scrambling)
11 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes
24 planes vectored on to bombers
Kaga-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 20 on standby, 0 scrambling)
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 24 minutes
22 planes vectored on to bombers
Soryu-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 17 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiryu-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 1000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
9 planes vectored on to bombers
Shokaku-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
12 planes vectored on to bombers
Zuikaku-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 19 minutes
6 planes vectored on to bombers
Taiho-1 with A6M5 Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 31 minutes
9 planes vectored on to bombers
Unryu-1 with A6M5b Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 17000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
18 planes vectored on to bombers
Amagi-1 with A6M5b Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 16 minutes
15 planes vectored on to bombers
Katsuragi-1 with A6M5c Zero (0 airborne, 18 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 8000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
6 planes vectored on to bombers
78th Sentai with Ki-44-IIc Tojo (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 5 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers

Ammo storage explosion on CVL Ryujo
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring a Taiyo class CVE
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring DD Wakaba
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Katsuragi
Fuel storage explosion on CV Hiryu




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Namlea (76,108)

53 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
KV Freesia
KV Aster
APD Waters
APD Manley
APD Stewart
APA Custer

Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

KV Freesia fired at enemy troops
KV Aster fired at enemy troops
APD Waters fired at enemy troops
APD Manley fired at enemy troops
APD Stewart fired at enemy troops
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 6,000 yards
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 1,000 yards


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Namlea (76,108)

TF 438 troops unloading over beach at Namlea, 76,108

Allied ground losses:
86 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 15 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)

15 Support troops accidentally lost during unload of 4th Marine Div /2
Motorized Support lost overboard during unload of 4th Marine Div /7




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Namlea (76,108)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 2377 troops, 27 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 101

Defending force 10425 troops, 144 guns, 191 vehicles, Assault Value = 432

Japanese ground losses:
10 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
Yokosuka 4th SNLF
Ankei SNLF /1
69th JAAF AF Bn

Defending units:
4th Marine Div /1
1st Army Tank Rgt /1








Attachment (1)

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3197
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 10:13:09 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3198
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 10:14:43 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by GreyJoy -- 10/27/2013 10:15:27 AM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3199
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 10:25:49 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4732
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
You still put up heck of a fight. And you have delayed him in almost the exact same place for over a year now? No reason the hang with you head. You played masterfully!

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3200
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 10:26:22 AM   
obvert


Posts: 6957
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online
Wow. Sorry Nic. That is tough with the reaction. I do hate that 'feature.'

Are your LBA bases nearby still active to help support the retreat? It's a tough spot as big bases are far away.

Good luck in the next turn.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3201
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 1:44:35 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5654
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

So guys, the time has come. The KB has finally failed. At the 5th Carrier engagement of the war, the allies finally managed to take the upper hand. Luck, flak and radar were all on their side this time.



I wouldn't go that far, rather to say the odds fiinally caught up with you and you were seriously out mtached. Given that, the KB did not fail, it did the best it could in the circumstances.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

During the morning severe storms obscured both fleets, but when the afternoon arrived, my search planes spotted them and my admirals (Nagumo, Yamaguchi and Abe) decided to react towards the enemy,
leaving all the BBs and CAs back...so abbandoning the flak cover...
The enemy reacted too and we anded up pretty close to each other...

The Mother of all instigators, reaction. Nimitz greatly feared the entire DEI area as there was insufficient sea room for his carriers and would not commit them. Every time this happens in a game, I remember this and think "Dang, that guy really understood his weapon platforms" Your outcome here isn't as bad as the classic with CF, but his happened in '42 IIRC.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Another thing that changed the outcome was that my stupid generals decided to attack first a CVETF 3 hexes east of the American CVs... We sunk 5 or 6 of them, but our major punch
lost its unity...and when it was time to attack the real target (CVs) we were badly outnumbered...


Not stupid, just FOW. 6x CVE even in RL could easily have been mistaken as a major strike force by the recon of the era.


So in summary, you took a bit of a gamble to snipe at the allies. Your guess was off as to exactly where they would end up and this was closer than you thought, caused everyone to react and create a pisspot. You're likely to lose 1x CV and 5xCVL (I count Jonyo as a CVL as she isn't all that big). The allies lost 6xCVE, 2xCV. So about even losses. Of course, allies will make this trade every day, but considering the odds you did REALLY good.

What did you learn? Well, nothing much more than you already knew. The A6M did far better than I would have imagined. You only lost 20% of your strike package on the way in, very acceptable losses. But as you noted, the strike got completely disorganized and came in dribbles which really hurt accuracy. Out of +225 bombers you got only 19 hits. Ouch.

On Defense, the A6M performed to expectations: lousy. Outnumbering the allied fighters 3:1, they still could not do the job. Out of 240 bombers, +180 made their attack getting 28 hits. They weren't as dispersed and so had better accuracy.

Where your luck held was that this happened in the afternoon. If this had been the morning phase, it would have been MUCH worse as the afternoon phase attack would have really hit you hard. As it is, with moderate luck and some LBA fighters you should be able to escape without more losses.

Not that bad really, all things considered. You ended up toe-2-toe in '44 with the allies and manged a tactical draw. Far better than the odds would suggest and far better than ever achieved historically.



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3202
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 3:15:51 PM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 16557
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Dang! 240 bombers in one strike group. Can you imagine that?

I wonder if anyone caught that on their cell phone?

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3203
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 3:24:36 PM   
Cap Mandrake

 

Posts: 16557
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

You still put up heck of a fight. And you have delayed him in almost the exact same place for over a year now? No reason the hang with you head. You played masterfully!



Yes, exactly! Fantastic defense.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3204
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 3:24:51 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 2612
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Dang! 240 bombers in one strike group. Can you imagine that?

I wonder if anyone caught that on their cell phone?


I do wonder if Greyjoy's strikes failed a die roll due to strike size and thus came in disorganized? While the Allies passed their die roll?

_____________________________

Patients and providers of healthcare win with interprofessional practice http://ipep.arizona.edu/blog

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 3205
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 4:18:36 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

So guys, the time has come. The KB has finally failed. At the 5th Carrier engagement of the war, the allies finally managed to take the upper hand. Luck, flak and radar were all on their side this time.



I wouldn't go that far, rather to say the odds fiinally caught up with you and you were seriously out mtached. Given that, the KB did not fail, it did the best it could in the circumstances.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

During the morning severe storms obscured both fleets, but when the afternoon arrived, my search planes spotted them and my admirals (Nagumo, Yamaguchi and Abe) decided to react towards the enemy,
leaving all the BBs and CAs back...so abbandoning the flak cover...
The enemy reacted too and we anded up pretty close to each other...

The Mother of all instigators, reaction. Nimitz greatly feared the entire DEI area as there was insufficient sea room for his carriers and would not commit them. Every time this happens in a game, I remember this and think "Dang, that guy really understood his weapon platforms" Your outcome here isn't as bad as the classic with CF, but his happened in '42 IIRC.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Another thing that changed the outcome was that my stupid generals decided to attack first a CVETF 3 hexes east of the American CVs... We sunk 5 or 6 of them, but our major punch
lost its unity...and when it was time to attack the real target (CVs) we were badly outnumbered...


Not stupid, just FOW. 6x CVE even in RL could easily have been mistaken as a major strike force by the recon of the era.


So in summary, you took a bit of a gamble to snipe at the allies. Your guess was off as to exactly where they would end up and this was closer than you thought, caused everyone to react and create a pisspot. You're likely to lose 1x CV and 5xCVL (I count Jonyo as a CVL as she isn't all that big). The allies lost 6xCVE, 2xCV. So about even losses. Of course, allies will make this trade every day, but considering the odds you did REALLY good.

What did you learn? Well, nothing much more than you already knew. The A6M did far better than I would have imagined. You only lost 20% of your strike package on the way in, very acceptable losses. But as you noted, the strike got completely disorganized and came in dribbles which really hurt accuracy. Out of +225 bombers you got only 19 hits. Ouch.

On Defense, the A6M performed to expectations: lousy. Outnumbering the allied fighters 3:1, they still could not do the job. Out of 240 bombers, +180 made their attack getting 28 hits. They weren't as dispersed and so had better accuracy.

Where your luck held was that this happened in the afternoon. If this had been the morning phase, it would have been MUCH worse as the afternoon phase attack would have really hit you hard. As it is, with moderate luck and some LBA fighters you should be able to escape without more losses.

Not that bad really, all things considered. You ended up toe-2-toe in '44 with the allies and manged a tactical draw. Far better than the odds would suggest and far better than ever achieved historically.





Thanks for the kind words Pax (and all of you too guys).
I'm not that sad for the outcome. I knew this day could have arrived, sooner or later. We managed to win 4 out of 5 carrier engagements in this war, even if none of them was really decisive as they could have been, i think the Japanese Navy performed well, everything considered.
The real factor here has been the flak. Believe me. In 1944, with DBB, the allied flak is decisive! Much more than the Hellcat. It's the flak who made my bombers score so few hits.


So now, what's next?
I need to save as many CVs as possible...but as Obvert said, it will be a risky run...and even if we manage to save them, the allies will have free time to advance towards Mindanao without the KB's threat...
I now need to speed up my defences in the PI...All the float planes will be commissioned to pick up infantry units from frontline bases and i'm also considering abbandoning Burma...it's pointless to defend so forward there while the allies are knocking my door in the PI...


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3206
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 4:24:55 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

You still put up heck of a fight. And you have delayed him in almost the exact same place for over a year now? No reason the hang with you head. You played masterfully!



Yes, exactly! Fantastic defense.



Thanks! but i don't think it's over yet. They still have to face my second defensive line and our air army is still strong. We've now lost (strategically) Timor and Ambon-Boela (all bypassed), but there's still a long long way to Japan.


Supplies will be a problem, but the Emperor has ordered to fight till the yakees are estabilished in the Imperial Palace...so we're gonna fight till the very very end!

BANZAI!!!

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 3207
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 4:26:53 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Dang! 240 bombers in one strike group. Can you imagine that?

I wonder if anyone caught that on their cell phone?


I do wonder if Greyjoy's strikes failed a die roll due to strike size and thus came in disorganized? While the Allies passed their die roll?



mmm... don't think so. The roll failed on both sides cause we did have a lot of isolated packages attacking (didn't post them). The two major strikes were, however, very effective on both sides. Simply this time weather was better for Brad than me and i did have just one BB with me to absorbe some torpedoes/bombs.


(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 3208
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 4:52:09 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1381
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
You still put up heck of a fight. And you have delayed him in almost the exact same place for over a year now? No reason the hang with you head. You played masterfully!

Thanks! but i don't think it's over yet. They still have to face my second defensive line and our air army is still strong. We've now lost (strategically) Timor and Ambon-Boela (all bypassed), but there's still a long long way to Japan.

Supplies will be a problem, but the Emperor has ordered to fight till the yakees are estabilished in the Imperial Palace...so we're gonna fight till the very very end!

BANZAI!!!

I quite agree with JocMeister. You have played masterfully. Q-Ball is no tyro and you guys have traded (and absorbed) blows like the professionals.

Take the hits, but figure out what to do with what's left and go on. Can't begin to say how much I'm enjoying this game between the two of you. You both play the game like it was intended. I'm usually on the edge of my seat reading ya'lls AARs. Thought, planning, understanding of "calculated risk", execution within the plan, what you guys have done so far is frikkin epic.

I'll put this on Q-Ball's thread, too.

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Yippy Ki Yay

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3209
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/27/2013 5:00:02 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6133
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
You still put up heck of a fight. And you have delayed him in almost the exact same place for over a year now? No reason the hang with you head. You played masterfully!

Thanks! but i don't think it's over yet. They still have to face my second defensive line and our air army is still strong. We've now lost (strategically) Timor and Ambon-Boela (all bypassed), but there's still a long long way to Japan.

Supplies will be a problem, but the Emperor has ordered to fight till the yakees are estabilished in the Imperial Palace...so we're gonna fight till the very very end!

BANZAI!!!

I quite agree with JocMeister. You have played masterfully. Q-Ball is no tyro and you guys have traded (and absorbed) blows like the professionals.

Take the hits, but figure out what to do with what's left and go on. Can't begin to say how much I'm enjoying this game between the two of you. You both play the game like it was intended. I'm usually on the edge of my seat reading ya'lls AARs. Thought, planning, understanding of "calculated risk", execution within the plan, what you guys have done so far is frikkin epic.

I'll put this on Q-Ball's thread, too.

Ciao. JWE



Wow, Thanks JWE!
The quality of my AAR has decreased unfortunately...too little time lately to write it down as it should deserve. I wish i could be as good as Obvert in making the posts...

However thanks! We both have done some great things, but also some serious mistakes were made on both parts. Can't say how much i like the DBB mod. The flak for example... now it's a factor, both for Japs and for the allies. Land flak and naval flak, they both work perfectly imho, giving a great experience, much more realistic than in stock.

The good thing for me, so far, is that QBall managed to advance on just one front. The CENTPAC is still closed for him, with Sarmi still holding as if they were devils!
In Burma, even if we lost Akyab and now are ready to lose Ramree, we're still keeping them off from the plains. The oil production of Borneo and Sumatra should remain intact for some more months hopefully

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 3210
Page:   <<   < prev  105 106 [107] 108 109   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The battle for Lautem Page: <<   < prev  105 106 [107] 108 109   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.162