Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager will be launching on SteamCome and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another update
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: No fleet, no problem...

 
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: No fleet, no problem... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/16/2013 8:19:42 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 4259
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

Overnight an IJN SC TF made up of 2 fast BBs, 4 CAs and about a half-dozen DDs attempted to assault Adak Island. They initially met the 4-CA SC TF and in rough fighting 1 USN CA went down while an IJN CA was badly damaged. Later the same IJN TF met with the DD TF at Adak and sank 2 of my DDs in return for some moderate damage to a couple of IJN DDs. The lack of upgrades and radar on these ships is now being felt. Two PT boat TFs got into action as well although they scored no torpedo hits and suffered some losses.

The USN TFs succeeded in their task though in that the airfield was not bombarded. At daybreak the IJN SC TF had been broken up with clashes with two elements showing that at least 3 CAs had split from the force.


A rousing surface fight! Do you have any subs in the area?

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 121
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/16/2013 9:32:13 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
LOTS, check out the picture.

In other great news I've managed to sneak a transport TF carrying an SC-270 radar into Adak. If it survives the night and unloads I'll finally have radar there - which will help hugely.

I've decided that, on their way home from Adak, the SC TFs will sprint out to intercept any other bombardment TFs racing in from his amphibious shipping. I'd like to disrupt them or get a lucky intercept on some amphibious shipping before I retire to Dutch Harbour. The BB TFs will take over tomorrow and then after that I'll feed in the 1 slow and 1 fast BB which will have arrived tomorrow.

After that I'll have to just examine what I have left can recycle into the maelstrom.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/16/2013 9:34:49 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 122
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/17/2013 7:10:41 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Well, there were no night-time interceptions but that's fine. It would just have been a bonus.

Today saw one of my subs taking a shot at two retreating IJN CAs. It missed but at least it shows they are involved. My SB2U3s flew from Attu. Unfortunately they flew without escorts and lost 9 of their number to enemy fighters. Thankfully the CAP was very light and the 6 survivors broke through and planted two 1,000lb bombs into enemy xAPs. That ought to convince them to stop dancing around and commit to whatever invasion they have planned - looking more and more like Attu Island.

I'm a bit concerned that Damian is demoralised by recent events. He has rued his lack of concentration of forces on the Aleutians ( CAs swanning around around Oz being distracted into forming FT TFs - when one can rebuild divisions far more rapidly than one can build a new CA - was a waste of effort I was glad to encourage ) since his SC TF has used up a large amount of ammunition and cannot replenish while underway. What I don't want him to do is thikn that Attu is too difficult a target and call off the whole thing and just invade the Kuriles since I haven't had time to properly form the resupply effort to those 2 islands.

So, tomorrow will see the cessation of Allied offensive action in this theatre as well as a slowing of the RN movement- basically I'm going to put them in port to repair damage before committing them whereas previously I was going to send them in immediately. If I sent them in immediately it might really cause him to focus on whether he has the strength to maintain any stronghold and I don't want him to think that way. I want him to land, get stuck and give me on-going target practice against IJN elements over the coming months.

Anyways I'm going to sit there quiescently until I'm sure he is committed to a landing. Forces in Dutch Harbour have been put into pierside repair and repair ship mode so long as they are available again in 6 days time... when I estimate I'll need them for phase 3 operations.


I'm moving support elements up to Adak to support operations based there vs Attu ( now that I'm surer than ever that he is going for Attu and not Adak ). Tomorrow should see a fully loaded AE, AG and AS join the AD already at Adak. I'm also moving 200 engineers, a USN Base Force, 5 AAA Regiments and other engineering elements into Adak to double the number of engineers to 400. I will then begin rapidly building up the base. I want to be able to use Adak as a major base once I have his infantry stuck on Attu.

I am using Prince Rupert as my hub for shipping troops etc into the Aleutians and I thought the size of the logistical effort would be nicely demonstrated by the fact that I currently have 25,000 men, over 50,000 tons of equipment, 50,000 tons of supplies and 120,000 tons of fuel making the 6 day journey from Prince Rupert to Adak. Tomorrow another 60,000 ton convoy will form at Rupert and ship another 60,000 tons of men, equipment,supplies.



In other news: I previously forgot to mention a dozen MGBs and MTBs left over from Hong Kong which were disbanded into a port in southern China. I have a bit of a mania about unused forces. Everything should be doing something and there should never be a force which is just sitting, doing nothing. Certainly there shouldn't be a dozen PT boats astride major enemy SLOCs 9 months after the war has started which seem to never have engaged in any raids. So I used them to raid Hong Kong and Hainan and sank an enemy PB, an enemy xAKL and damaged several more. Once they refuel they'll go out again. Eventually they'll be wiped out but the choice was between leaving them in port doing nothing waiting for them to be taken out by a bomber unit training using the port attack mission or using them and sinking 4 or 5 enemy ships with them before they are destroyed. That's hardly a choice at all.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/17/2013 7:12:33 AM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 123
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/17/2013 5:01:51 PM   
floydg

 

Posts: 1814
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

In other news: I previously forgot to mention a dozen MGBs and MTBs left over from Hong Kong which were disbanded into a port in southern China. I have a bit of a mania about unused forces. Everything should be doing something and there should never be a force which is just sitting, doing nothing. Certainly there shouldn't be a dozen PT boats astride major enemy SLOCs 9 months after the war has started which seem to never have engaged in any raids. So I used them to raid Hong Kong and Hainan and sank an enemy PB, an enemy xAKL and damaged several more. Once they refuel they'll go out again. Eventually they'll be wiped out but the choice was between leaving them in port doing nothing waiting for them to be taken out by a bomber unit training using the port attack mission or using them and sinking 4 or 5 enemy ships with them before they are destroyed. That's hardly a choice at all.



They have even more notches on their belt -- I was doing the same. These boats were evacuated from the Philippines and I was making raids on HK every so often. Damian did try to go after them in port and docked, but never had any real success.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 124
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/17/2013 8:26:19 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 4259
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

I'm moving support elements up to Adak to support operations based there vs Attu ( now that I'm surer than ever that he is going for Attu and not Adak ). Tomorrow should see a fully loaded AE, AG and AS join the AD already at Adak. I'm also moving 200 engineers, a USN Base Force, 5 AAA Regiments and other engineering elements into Adak to double the number of engineers to 400. I will then begin rapidly building up the base.


I assume the radar was successfully unloaded?


quote:

In other news: I previously forgot to mention a dozen MGBs and MTBs left over from Hong Kong which were disbanded into a port in southern China. I have a bit of a mania about unused forces. Everything should be doing something and there should never be a force which is just sitting, doing nothing. Certainly there shouldn't be a dozen PT boats astride major enemy SLOCs 9 months after the war has started which seem to never have engaged in any raids. So I used them to raid Hong Kong and Hainan and sank an enemy PB, an enemy xAKL and damaged several more. Once they refuel they'll go out again. Eventually they'll be wiped out but the choice was between leaving them in port doing nothing waiting for them to be taken out by a bomber unit training using the port attack mission or using them and sinking 4 or 5 enemy ships with them before they are destroyed.


And it never hurts to distract an opponent's attention.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 125
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 1:19:42 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Harlock,

Indeed it never does... But what he has seen so far is small beans. Tomorrow Allied infantry finish their march through the jungle and take one of the northern Burmese bases, cutting off the strategic movement escape route of the IJA elements at Myitkina.

In two weeks another 600 AV come in behind the northernmost defensive line which Damian could use to block the troops which take the base today and another week later I should be in good shape to amphibiously dislocate the defences vs Ramree and along the riverline ( which is where he should defend vs the 600 AV incursion.

Plus at some point over the next month he'll probably discover what I've been up to with Operation Sneaky and find another major defensive line he is planning to fall back to in another theatre has already been penetrated irretrievably. At that point in time he'll have two choices:
1. Sacrifice several infantry divisions to halt my ground forces while he mops up the penetration or
2. Fall back to a deeper defensive line in return for being able to save those divisions.

Either outcome works for me. What he should do is sacrifice the infantry divisions since he can rebuild them but he can NEVER recover the 2-3 months of delay which he'll lose if he abandons the defensive line.

Damian now recognises that Carnarvon and rescuing the IJA division there using the CAs was a major error. Those CAs should have gone to giving him strength in depth at the Aleutians. Losing and rebuilding that division wouldn't have allowed me to accelerate my timelines at all while failing to make a landing in the Aleutians stick is going to allow me to keep an entire theatre open and attriting him going forward.


I thought it would be instructive to post the Operations Report and Combat Reports from today and then explain what I take from them. Basically though I think the IJN has just shot its bolt in the Aleutians and victory is now pretty assured, so long as Damian hasn't brought more than 3 or 4 infantry divisions.

Ops Report:
23 x R4D1 transporting the 201st(Sep) Infantry Regiment to Adak Island.
79 PBYs transporting the 23rd Marine Regiment to Adak Island.
22 C-47s in reserve.

Today the IJN shows its hand in terms of aiming to land at Attu Island and so, from tomorrow, the R4D1s and C-47s will displace to Adak island and commence flying the remainder of the 23rd Marine Regt to Adak while the PBYs will remain in Dutch Harbour and transport a US Army Infantry Regt directly to Attu. Over the next 4 days they should each transport a Regt in, raising the AC from just under 400 to about 600 AV.


Combat Report:
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Sep 09, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
CA Takao
CL Abukuma
DD Akizuki
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki

Allied Ships
PT-36, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-37
PT-38
PT-39

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 0% moonlight: 2,000 yards

Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 2,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 2,000 yards
DD Hatsuyuki fires at PT-39 at 2,000 yards
PT-36 sunk by DD Hatsuyuki at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 3,000 yards
BB Mutsu engages PT-38 at 3,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
DD Hatsuyuki engages PT-39 at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-39 at 6,000 yards
Greene, J. orders Allied TF to disengage
Task forces break off...

Great weather to slip in close with radar-less ships and try to get lucky vs the IJN SC elements and, later, its amphibious elements.

As you can see the BBs engage the PT boats, wasting main gun ammo.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
CA Takao
CL Abukuma
DD Akizuki
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki

Allied Ships
PT-116
PT-120
PT-125
PT-126

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 0% moonlight: 2,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 2,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 2,000 yards
Nolan, N.P. gains tactical advantage
BB Mutsu engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
BB Fuso engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 4,000 yards
BB Mutsu engages PT-126 at 4,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-125 at 4,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-126 at 4,000 yards
Nolan, N.P. orders Allied TF to disengage
Task forces break off...

3 BBs and the CA waste their fire on PT boats

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
CA Takao
CL Abukuma
DD Akizuki
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki

Allied Ships
PT-40
PT-115
PT-117
PT-118, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms with 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 0% moonlight: 2,000 yards
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 2,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 2,000 yards
PT-118 sunk by BB Mutsu at 2,000 yards
Story, S.O. orders Allied TF to disengage
Task forces break off...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 153 encounters mine field at Attu Island (153,49)

Japanese Ships
DD Akizuki, Mine hits 1

The 400+ mines claims their first victim.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Hong Kong at 77,61, Range 2,000 Yards

Nuisance raids continue.


Japanese Ships
CL Jintsu
CL Nagara
CL Isuzu
CL Kuma
DD Oboro
DD Akebono
DD Mutsuki

Allied Ships
PT-32
PT Q-111
PT Q-112

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 0% moonlight: 2,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 2,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 2,000 yards
Larrazabal G. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range increases to 6,000 yards
Allied PT Boat TF evades combat


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Attu Island at 153,49

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 28 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 5 destroyed on ground
PBY-5 Catalina: 16 damaged
PBY-5 Catalina: 4 destroyed on ground
B-17E Fortress: 20 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 1 destroyed on ground
P-40E Warhawk: 8 damaged
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed on ground

These results are VERY FOW-y. I only have 8 B-17s and 12 PBYs on the entire island.


Japanese Ships
BB Fuso
BB Mutsu
BB Nagato
CL Abukuma

Allied ground losses:
63 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (2 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Airbase hits 8
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 21
Port hits 20
Port supply hits 2

Very minor damage.


BB Fuso firing at Attu Island
BB Mutsu firing at Attu Island
BB Nagato firing at Attu Island
CL Abukuma firing at Attu Island


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
CL Abukuma
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki

Allied Ships
PT-37
PT-38
PT-39, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 22,000 yards...
Range closes to 20,000 yards...
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 16,000 yards...
Range closes to 14,000 yards...
Range closes to 12,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 6,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
BB Nagato engages PT-39 at 7,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-39 at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
PT-39 sunk by BB Mutsu at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
BB Nagato engages PT-38 at 6,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
BB Fuso engages PT-38 at 5,000 yards
Range closes to 4,000 yards
BB Mutsu engages PT-37 at 4,000 yards
BB Nagato engages PT-38 at 4,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards

Range increases to 10,000 yards
Range increases to 16,000 yards
BB Fuso engages PT-38 at 16,000 yards
Task forces break off...

Main gun and secondary guns from the BBs engaged the PTs. I don't care much about the wasting of IJN 5 inch rounds but every 14 or 16 inch gun salvo wasted firing at PTs is a salve of 14 or 16 inch shells which they will NOT have to face my BBs in 2 days time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Takao
DD Akizuki

Allied Ships
PT-40, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-115
PT-117, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Low visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 20,000 yards...
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 16,000 yards...
Range closes to 14,000 yards...
Range closes to 12,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 6,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 6,000 yards
Rakowski, R.T. gains tactical advantage
PT-40 sunk by CA Takao at 6,000 yards

PT-115 engages DD Akizuki at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-117 at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
PT-117 engages CA Takao at 6,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-117 at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 8,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-117 at 8,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 8,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-117 at 8,000 yards

DD Akizuki engages PT-117 at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 7,000 yards
DD Akizuki engages PT-117 at 7,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 7,000 yards
Range closes to 6,000 yards
PT-117 sunk by CA Takao at 6,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 6,000 yards

Rakowski, R.T. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range increases to 14,000 yards
CA Takao engages PT-115 at 14,000 yards
Task forces break off...

Takao was firing 8 inch rounds since both of these hits were 1 hit obliterations by 20cm shells.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 3,000 Yards

Ah, this is the remnants of that CA TF I fought around Adak Island 2 nights ago.


Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Tone
CA Chokai
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CL Kiso
CL Yubari
DD Kagero
DD Isokaze
DD Kisaragi
DD Nagatsuki
DD Mochizuki

Allied Ships
PT-116
PT-120
PT-125, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-126

Low visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 17,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
Range closes to 3,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 3,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 3,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
PT-125 engages DD Mochizuki at 2,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-120 at 2,000 yards
CA Chokai engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
DD Mochizuki engages PT-120 at 2,000 yards
DD Nagatsuki engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
Nolan, N.P. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range increases to 5,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-126 at 5,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-126 at 5,000 yards
DD Kagero engages PT-120 at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
DD Isokaze engages PT-120 at 7,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-116 at 7,000 yards
DD Mochizuki engages PT-126 at 7,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-125 at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-125 at 8,000 yards
Range increases to 12,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-126 at 12,000 yards
CA Aoba engages PT-126 at 12,000 yards

DD Nagatsuki engages PT-125 at 12,000 yards
DD Kagero engages PT-125 at 12,000 yards
Range increases to 14,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-126 at 14,000 yards
CA Aoba engages PT-126 at 14,000 yards
DD Nagatsuki engages PT-125 at 14,000 yards
DD Isokaze engages PT-125 at 14,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-120 at 14,000 yards
DD Mochizuki engages PT-125 at 14,000 yards
Range increases to 16,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-126 at 16,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-120 at 16,000 yards
DD Isokaze engages PT-126 at 16,000 yards
Range increases to 17,000 yards
DD Nagatsuki engages PT-125 at 17,000 yards
DD Kagero engages PT-125 at 17,000 yards
Range increases to 18,000 yards
DD Isokaze engages PT-120 at 18,000 yards
PT-125 sunk by DD Kagero at 18,000 yards
Nolan, N.P. orders Allied TF to disengage
CA Kinugasa engages PT-126 at 18,000 yards
BB Haruna engages PT-116 at 18,000 yards
Task forces break off...

Again, wasting of ammunition from large guns vs PTs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,49, Range 5,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Tone
CA Chokai
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CL Kiso
CL Yubari
DD Kagero
DD Isokaze
DD Kisaragi
DD Nagatsuki
DD Mochizuki

Allied Ships
PT-122

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 15,000 yards...
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 5,000 yards
Strehle, W.M. gains tactical advantage
Range closes to 2,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-122 at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-122 at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 9,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-122 at 9,000 yards
Range increases to 12,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-122 at 12,000 yards
CL Yubari engages PT-122 at 12,000 yards
DD Kagero engages PT-122 at 12,000 yards
Range increases to 16,000 yards
DD Kisaragi engages PT-122 at 16,000 yards
DD Kagero engages PT-122 at 16,000 yards
Task forces break off...

The heavier ships stop firing

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 31 encounters mine field at Attu Island (153,49)

Japanese Ships
DD Mochizuki
DD Isokaze

3 mines cleared



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 152,49, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
CL Abukuma
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki

Allied Ships
PT-61
PT-75
PT-121, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-124, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 20,000 yards...
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 16,000 yards...
Range closes to 14,000 yards...
Range closes to 12,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 7,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 6,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 6,000 yards
PT-124 engages CL Abukuma at 6,000 yards
DD Hatsuyuki engages PT-124 at 6,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-124 at 6,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages PT-121 at 5,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages PT-61 at 5,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages PT-124 at 5,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages PT-61 at 5,000 yards
BB Mutsu engages PT-124 at 5,000 yards
BB Nagato engages PT-124 at 5,000 yards
BB Mutsu engages PT-61 at 5,000 yards

PT-121 sunk by DD Hatsuyuki at 5,000 yards
CL Abukuma engages PT-61 at 5,000 yards
DD Hatsuyuki engages PT-75 at 5,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-124 at 5,000 yards
Presnell, H.B. orders Allied TF to disengage
BB Mutsu engages PT-124 at 5,000 yards
DD Hatsuyuki engages PT-61 at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 12,000 yards
DD Yugure engages PT-124 at 12,000 yards
Range increases to 17,000 yards
PT-124 sunk by BB Mutsu at 17,000 yards
Task forces break off...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Attu Island at 153,50, Range 3,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Tama

Allied Ships
PT-116, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PT-120
PT-126, Shell hits 1

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 4,000 yards
Range closes to 15,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
Range closes to 3,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 3,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 3,000 yards
CL Tama fires at PT-126 at 3,000 yards
PT-116 sunk by CL Tama at 3,000 yards
Nolan, N.P. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range closes to 2,000 yards
CL Tama engages PT-126 at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
CL Tama engages PT-126 at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
CL Tama engages PT-126 at 10,000 yards
Task forces break off...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Akyab , at 54,45

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 20 NM, estimated altitude 27,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 30

Allied aircraft
P-400 Airacobra x 19
P-40E Warhawk x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-400 Airacobra: 3 destroyed


Aircraft Attacking:
19 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 24000 feet

CAP engaged:
23rd FG/75th FS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 25000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes
23rd FG/76th FS with P-400 Airacobra (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 13 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 20000 and 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 37 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Uruppu-jima , at 130,52

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 73 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 31 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N1 Kate: 2 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
18 x B5N1 Kate bombing from 5000 feet
Port Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Uruppu-jima , at 130,52

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 43 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D3A1 Val x 12

Allied aircraft
no flights

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 damaged

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 10

He's just trying to keep the airbase here closed. What he doesn't know is that it is already open. I'm saving that as a surprise to catch his damaged shipping as they retire back to Japan after the battle.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 19
G3M2 Nell x 9
G4M1 Betty x 30

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 damaged

Airbase hits 8
Runway hits 31


Aircraft Attacking:
30 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb
9 x G3M2 Nell bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 18 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G3M2 Nell x 27
G4M1 Betty x 25

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M2 Nell: 1 damaged

Allied ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Airbase hits 11
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 51

Aircraft Attacking:
25 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 4000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb
27 x G3M2 Nell bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 5 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 1
B4Y1 Jean x 17

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Port hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
17 x B4Y1 Jean bombing from 5000 feet
Port Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 17 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N2 Kate x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 1 damaged

Allied ground losses:
7 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
23 x B5N2 Kate bombing from 6000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb

Lots and lots of IJNAF pilots bombing ground targets instead of training to attack my shipping. That's quite a nice indirect victory.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 13 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 3
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-49-Ia Helen: 1 damaged

Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 11

Aircraft Attacking:
23 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
3 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Uruppu-jima , at 130,52

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 22 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-30 Ann x 35

Allied aircraft
no flights

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 damaged

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 10


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Akyab , at 54,45

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 26,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
P-400 Airacobra x 2

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-400 Airacobra: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 24000 feet

CAP engaged:
23rd FG/76th FS with P-400 Airacobra (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 26000 and 27000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 8th Chinese Corps, at 83,49 , near Ichang

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 5 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 8
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 21

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
41 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
21 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 6000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Carnarvon , at 49,133

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 21

Allied aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-Ic Sally: 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Beaufighter Ic: 5 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 8 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 1 destroyed on ground

Runway hits 4

Aircraft Attacking:
21 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 7000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Nanning , at 72,55

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 34 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 8
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 11
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 51

No Japanese losses

Light Industry hits 1

Japanese strategic bombing in China... It isn't worth the effort if you ask me. These bombers would be better spent replacing the IJNAF pilots being misused over the Kuriles.


Aircraft Attacking:
34 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
City Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
17 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
City Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Wenchow , at 89,58

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 10 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 3 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 25

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-Ic Sally: 1 damaged

Light Industry hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
25 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 6000 feet
City Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 2 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 0 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 8
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 24

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-Ic Sally: 1 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Airfield Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Shimushiri-jima , at 132,51

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 5 NM, estimated altitude 25,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 24

No Japanese losses

Aircraft Attacking:
24 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar bombing from 22000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 15 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 3rd Prov Chinese Corps, at 92,34 (Paotow)

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 18 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-49-Ia Helen: 1 damaged

Allied ground losses:
33 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
23 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 7000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Imperial Guards Division, at 57,49 , near Toungoo

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 2


Allied aircraft
Hudson IIIa x 4

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

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

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Hudson IIIa bombing from 6000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Kanoya Ku S-1/A with A5M4 Claude (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(2 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 20000
Raid is overhead

Hmm, an indicator that pools are low? I think so.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on Tsiaotso , at 88,42

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 17 NM, estimated altitude 25,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 23

No Japanese losses

Aircraft Attacking:
23 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 25000 feet



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on 7th Chinese Corps, at 87,45 , near Chengchow

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 5 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 10
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 20

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
77 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb

More IJNAF bombers wasting their talents.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on 7th Chinese Corps, at 87,45 , near Chengchow

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 18 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 23

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
69 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
12 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb

Also attacking 84th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 7th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 84th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 7th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 84th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 7th Chinese Corps ...
Also attacking 84th Chinese Corps ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on 20th Chinese Corps, at 83,52 , near Changsha

Weather in hex: Extreme overcast

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-48-Ib Lily x 20

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
47 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-48-Ib Lily bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 100 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Attu Island at 153,49

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 32 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 12 destroyed on ground
PBY-5 Catalina: 9 damaged
PBY-5 Catalina: 3 destroyed on ground
B-17E Fortress: 70 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 3 destroyed on ground
P-40E Warhawk: 25 damaged
P-40E Warhawk: 8 destroyed on ground

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna
CA Kinugasa
CA Aoba
CA Chokai
CA Tone
CL Yubari
CL Kiso
CL Tama

Allied ground losses:
357 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 26 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 7 disabled
Vehicles lost 11 (2 destroyed, 9 disabled)

Airbase hits 14
Airbase supply hits 12
Runway hits 46
Port hits 14
Port supply hits 3

E13A1 Jake acting as spotter for BB Haruna
BB Haruna firing at 23rd Marine Regiment
CA Kinugasa firing at Attu Island
CA Aoba firing at Attu Island
CA Chokai firing at Attu Island
CA Tone firing at Attu Island
CL Yubari firing at Attu Island
CL Kiso firing at Attu Island
CL Tama firing at Attu Island

In reality this is just making this SC TF less and less capable of winning a naval engagement and plays into my hands. I have so many engineers at Attu that there's no chance of the base remaining closed. Only a an alpha strike from KB would close it for a meaningful period of time.



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

Ground combat at Chuhsien (88,56)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 9437 troops, 80 guns, 18 vehicles, Assault Value = 1231

Defending force 35222 troops, 150 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1227

Assaulting units:
54th Division
17th Ind.Mixed Brigade
22nd Division
20th Engineer Regiment
17th/A Division

Defending units:
70th Chinese Corps
86th Chinese Corps
28th Chinese Corps
88th Chinese Corps
16th Construction Regiment
3rd War Area
10th Group Army



So, my count of IJN surface elements in the Aleutians now reads:
BB Nagato
BB Mutsu
BB Fuso
BB Haruna

CA Takao
CA Tone
CA Chokai
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa

CL Abukuma
CL Kiso
CL Yubari
CL Tama

DD Akizuki
DD Yugure
DD Hatsuyuki
DD Kagero
DD Isokaze
DD Kisaragi
DD Nagatsuki
DD Mochizuki

So, 4 BBs, 5 CAs, 4 CLs and 8 DDs.

All of these ships have fired on my pTs and again at the island. This means they've expended significant amounts of main gun ammunition. In addition in previous engagements the CA TF + fired off at least two rounds of torpedoes so some of the DDs in that TF will have no torpedoes left.

Now lets look at the logistics.... I have an AG ( for PT boats), an AD ( for destroyers and suchlike ), a 5,400 ton AE ( for the CLs, CAs and BBs ) and soon will have an AS ( for the subs ) at Adak Island. So, I can actually resupply all of my ship ammunition, including main gun rounds.

So, with this series of raids the IJN has robbed its SC TFs of their staying power. Even if they win a single night's engagements they won't have the ammunition to stay around for a 2nd or 3rd night in large numbers. My whole strategy has been based on phasing engagements over time in order to run the IJN out of large calibre ammunition whilst I phase waves of ships in and recycle the survivors. I knew the USN wasn't strong enough to win BUT it was, certainly, strong enough to exhaust the IJN covering elements --- which, if they retreat, would leave the amphibious elements uncovered and thus force their retreat, and the failure of the operation.

It would be interesting as part of the post-game analysis if someone were to ask Damian to post how much ammo had been expended from his BBs and CAs at this point. I obviously cannot ask him as that would:
a) tip my hand as to my strategy here and
b) be something which just wouldn't be right to ask in the context of a game like this.

So, logistics as a force multiplier. Since I have the proper logistics to repair ships within 20 hexes of Attu and the right logistics to fully reprovision my shipping within 10 hexes of Attu and the IJN has to go ALL the way back to Japan to achieve the same ( which is about 40 hexes ) I have a significant advantage logistically which I've used to design a logistics-based strategy which allows me to force the IJN surface combat elements out of battle without ever actually defeating them ( which would be impossible since I have fewer ships, damaged ships and ships which haven't had their upgrades ). But logistics lets me achieve my end-point without defeating the IJN.

This would be an example of changing the question when one didn't like the answer to the previous question. The previous question was, "How can the USN defeat the IJN SC elements in battle aruond the Aleutians?" The answer was that it couldn't so I changed the question to, "How could the USN force the IJN SC elements to be unable to cover the amphibious TFs ( which, in turn, weakens the landing and increases its cost )?"

My answer to that was phased engagements leveraging the USN logistical advantages ( which I have created through massive redeployment of US forces in the Pacific over the past 21 days ) such that the USN could render the IJN SC elements incapable of covering the amphibs without ever decisively defeating those IJN surface elements.

The only thing that has changed is that I thought I'd have to pin the IJN SC elements by letting the amphibs land first thus forcing the IJN SC elements to stay in the hex containing the invaded island, allowing me to phase SC TFs in to attrit their ammo and disrupt the landing. Instead Damian's been really kind in bombarding my airbases on several occasions, wasting large calibre ammunition which will take him 4 times longer to replenish than it'll take the USN.

So, logistics, logistics, logistics!!! That's what it all comes down to... in real life and in this game --- which is a testament to the game design. Many games wouldn't show the impact of logistics in such a powerful fashion.



So here's the timeline:
Over the next week: Major engagements around the Aleutians, IJN wins/draws the surface combats but doesn't win decisively enough to give the amphibs all the time they need to conduct proper amphibious operations. Landing gets stranded. Burma deteriorates with Allied troops pushing across the border from India into northern Burma along 3 land routes and one Chinese unit ( which I've bought out to take advantage of the British division cutting off the troops at Myitkina ) moving across the border from China to cut their only other land route of escape ( he can airlift out the infantry but the tanks will be trapped and THAT will cost him).

Week 2: The pressure piles on in Oz and 3,000 AV appear out of the wilderness in China while he is distracted by a lot of meaningless manoeuvre in the centre and a gap in my lines in the west- which he is obligingly exploiting.... This gap he is exploiting is leading him to move directly away from where those forces will be needed next week.

Week 3-4: Littoral operations in Burma dislocate the defensive line he has formed there and Operation Sneaky unmasks. Reinforcements make for the Kuriles and turn those bases into bases capable of defending themselves and projecting power throughout the Kuriles. Chinese forces will either be left with their holdings - which will cost him significantly in 6 months time or he will push them back, at the cost of 4 IJA divisions + the need to allow for a 2 division rapid reaction force pinned into strategic irrelevance. Either solution works well for me.

Beyond 4 weeks... Depends on the situation in 4 weeks time really but broad strokes it should be as I outlined my initial plan. We've now largely moved from that point in the war where Japan had the initiative to where the Allies are increasingly imposing their operational tempo in pursuit of their strategic goals and are able to phase operations such that they pin strategic reserves, cause mis-allocation of resources in a fire brigade fashion ( IJNAF bombers conducting ground attack missions- it just shouldn't happen, that's not their role. You only misuse assets like that if there's a massive strategic need. In this case I think it is that he just doesn't have any other airframes available but, really, he could just leave the bases unbombed. That's what I'd do rather than misuse these pilots in this way.) and/or cause them to be deployed from theatre to theatre in a reactive fashion

Beyond that the situation will dictate what I can exploit.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 126
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 5:22:30 AM   
desicat

 

Posts: 308
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline
So what is YOUR Center of Gravity here? You laid out an interesting timeline for the next month. You stated earlier that if you were Japan you would fall back a bit and consolidate your lines.

In the NorthPac he is currently trying to cut your supply line to the Kuriles by invading Attu, something you both feared AND invited. Interesting that logistically Attu is your lifeline to the Kuriles yet Allied logistics are leading the the Japanese defeat. He is winning tactically yet you are winning strategically. You are postulating that he hurriedly threw together an invasion of Attu in an attempt to strangle the Kuriles - something you feared. To counter this threat you fed low value, almost disposable forces, Soviet style into the meat grinder. Logistically you can outlast his naval assets and he is without LBA support, time is on your side even if brute force is not. (BTW, I love the picture in post #122 showing you flooding the area with Subs, interesting use of those assets.) Is there a counter to superior Allied logistics? Attacking Attu is fine, shutting down the airfield is better, but a superior Japanese move would have been to pound Attu to draw in your assets but throw the main ground force into retaking the Kurile outposts where he has the logistical advantage AND LBA coverage.

Oz is a waste of his time. Your navy is gone so he needs to pull back and make you come to him.

Your moves in China are devious, but he really needs to commit more airpower to blunt your offensives and slow down your maneuvering.

In Burma you have him over a barrel. Long term he loses on the ground, especially if you are allowed to roll in units from China. He is fighting you at Ramree because everyone fights there, even to their own disadvantage.

Seems to me that he has relinquished the strategic offensive and is now spending all his time trying to counter YOUR moves. He has the superior Navy and Air Force yet he is letting you dictate where the battles are going to be fought.

So back to the question of your center of gravity? (From Wiki because I'm lazy) The definition of a CoG is "the source of power that provides moral or physical strength, freedom of action, or will to act." Thus, the center of gravity is usually seen as the "source of strength". By definition he can't get to your center of gravity (Allied in-game logistics)so he has to try and blunt the most vulnerable instruments fed by the Allied juggernaut.

Your Navy is basically crippled with the added bonus of you electing to not use any CV based Naval Air strikes. On the ground in pure head to head action the Japanese can't stand up to the Allies, he needs to use his air arm to leverage the battle field to his advantage here.

This leaves him with the need to employ his air assets in ways most advantageous to his objectives and in ways that deplete yours. Making him come to you over the islands North of OZ would be a good place to start. He needs to pound away at your ground forces in China, gaining valuable training and experience while forcing you to deploy sacrificial lambs to try and reduce the bleeding. He should put forth every effort to achieve total air superiority in the NorthPac and grind the Kuriles into dust.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 127
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 6:47:47 AM   
aoffen

 

Posts: 365
Joined: 6/7/2002
From: Brisvegas, Australia
Status: offline
Great AAR!!! It is impressive and very illuminating.
One question. How are you supporting your ground forces in the Darwin campaign? I tried an overland offensive against Darwin in my game and found it fell apart due to my inability to drag enough supplies forward to the combat troops. Tried every trick in the book and just couldn't get it to work. Ultimately I had to fall back from the gates of Darwin and wait fr the Japanese to evacuate more or less of their own accord 1 year later after I took Timor. The plus was I took it with a single militia brigade!! Anyway, how are you getting the supplies you need forward far enough?
Cheers
Andrew

(in reply to desicat)
Post #: 128
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 12:35:09 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
desicat,

Out of interest, what do YOU think the centre of gravity is and why? Anyone else can answer also obviously, I'd be interested to hear what people think. I know what I think it is but I also think most of you would probably disagree so I'm actually rather curious to see what others think.


Aoffen,
Well, you make it sound like you thought Darwin was a viable target using just an overland campaign over those trails in Northern Oz. I think it could be done but I think it would be very slow and the concept of pitting strength against strength in a slow, costly land battle isn't really appealing to me.

I decided that I COULD take Darwin if I had to via an overland campaign through:
a) massing troops along this axis and placing HQs as required to draw supplies.
b) acceptance of the fact that I would only be able to launch attacks once a week or so due to the supply situation
c) bombing of the enemy supply dumps/airfield and interdiction of enemy SLOCs with airpower.

Basically a point would come where the Japanese would be low on supplies and then Darwin would fall. Personally I think Damian wouldn't wait till that point and would cede me Darwin long before that in order to avoid painful losses to his xAK and xAP fleet. In other words, he'd delay as much as possible but once he realised he was going to be pushed all the way back to Darwin then he'd pull out rather than lose 2 or 3 divisions trapped there.


So, my plan is to press him pretty much all the way to Darwin - as I have done - and then ease up - as I have done - in order to let his front stabilise a bit. I'll cross his riverline in a week or so and dislocate his current front, forcing him back to the gates of Darwin. At that point I'll tell him the supply situation is very poor - which it will be and he'll draw the conclusion that I have trouble advancing due to lack of supplies. I'll attrit his airpower such that I can attack shipping coming and going.

I won't do anything decisive though as my plan all along has been to pin large IJA forces in Darwin whilst Operation Sneaky carries on. Basically this is the dislocation of the defensive line he is building and will occupy once Darwin falls/ is abandoned. Once I am happy with the depth and strength of this operational penetration ( which sounds much dirtier when I type it than when I planned it ;-) ) I'll unmask it and he'll find that the line he has built to occupy and delay me for 3+ months once Darwin falls is already fatally breached.

So, again, to my mind, an example of asking a different question when I didn't like the answer to the question: "How the hell can I supply troops to capture Darwin in a straight fight?" Answer, don't engage in a costly, slow slugging match for Darwin where the trails negate your logistics advantage but use the APPEARANCE of that intention to buy the time to manoeuvre and breach the NEXT defensive line even before the enemy abandons Darwin.


I think Damian has gotten a bit out of practice in terms of sneakiness. In previous games he was alive to the fact that whatever he saw happening may just have been what I wanted him to see so he could draw the wrong conclusions at the strategic level. The Soviets were all about maskirovka which is a much more complex and complete weaving of misdirection than simply hiding things. A good maskirovka hid certain things, showed other things and both accepted and refused action in order to create a narrative which misled the enemy. It was much more complex than simply not letting the Germans/NATO see what the Soviets were up to. They devoted massive forces to this, often involving entire Corps-level and Army-level attacks as part of the deception operations.

In this case 1,500+ AV are being used as deception and demonstration forces while about 250 AV are actually being used to drive deep.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to aoffen)
Post #: 129
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 3:16:31 PM   
desicat

 

Posts: 308
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

desicat,

Out of interest, what do YOU think the centre of gravity is and why? Anyone else can answer also obviously, I'd be interested to hear what people think. I know what I think it is but I also think most of you would probably disagree so I'm actually rather curious to see what others think.


Nemo, I'm not a big fan of identifying the COG as most times the effort fails (ball-bearings, the Republican Guard, Moscow, etc..) to identify the critical ASSET. The enemy has a vote and in an unlimited war (the answer is different in a limited war) they are forced to adapt and carry on to the current situation. For the Allies in WWII it was the political will to accept losses in the pursuit of unconditional surrender. In your game what would the Japanese have to deny to you to get YOU to capitulate? Nothing that I can think of. You have built in advantages that the Japanese do not such as an untouchable logistics base and an ability to accept losses that would have been politically unacceptable IRL.

So that leads to identifying your critical vulnerabilities in current game terms. The going in argument is that because of the game design Japan knows they are going to lose, its just a matter of time. This scenario seriously handicaps the Japanese economy making the holding of resource centers critical to his war efforts. He also needs to keep your strategic bombers away from the homeland industrial base or the resources sent in are of little value.

To me WITP AE is an exercise of Japan playing a game of trading space for time. It becomes a naval game of projecting air superiority. In China and Burma all things being equal Allied ground forces reign supreme. Unfortunately for the Allies all things aren't equal. Supply at the beginning is woefully short and Japanese air assets can be used to destroy, interdict, or reduce it. These same air assets can also be employed to attrit and restrict the movement of Allied ground forces; delay, delay, delay.

Japanese airframes become outclassed over time so they need to take advantage early when their have superior A/C or A/C equality with superior pilot quality. Losses are going to happen but if they occur over areas of Japans choosing they may recover some of their pilots.


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 130
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 4:10:49 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Sept 10th, 1942.

KB joins the fight over Attu Island - except that my fighters have already been pulled out. They've done their job, the semblance of resistance crushed has been achieved. There's no need for them to take additional losses until there's a requirement to cover the fleet when it moves to Attu Island.

In any case the FlAK claimed 5 Vals so every bit helps. PT boat TFs ranged out from Attu in all directions and there were a half-dozen inconclusive contacts overnight. In the morning KB's Zeroes bombed and strafed the PT boats. I think the survivors should be good for one more night's cover and then they'll all have expended themselves... Of course, by that time the PT boats which I'd deployed to cover Adak Island will have taken their place and the PT boats which have already expended their ammo will be at Adak and have reprovisioned and resupplied ready to go in again.

In short the cycling of forces in and out as a force multiplier using my logistics advantage has begun. Eventually Damian will realise he just has to send the amphibious TFs in and accept the risk of PT boat interception. That's when the USN SC TF elements will arrive, not overnight but during broad daylight the next day. The risks of a daylight sortie within 100 miles of KB is high but the benefits in terms of better gunnery outweigh them.

Carnarvon is now open for my fighters and a nice little ambush claims 7 Sallys and 7 Zeroes. Moving search planes in there will help push the IJN surface raiders back a bit and secure the SLOCs to Oz.


I thought it was probably time to show the situation in Burma. As you can see I've cut the road from Myitkina to Schwebo and am moving 2 Bdes to Schewbo to try to take it on the bounce. One Chinese Corps is trying to cut the trail between Lashio and Myitkina. This will rob Japan of 1.5 to 2 divisions worth of forces including significant tank forces - which would be very useful in the plains once my tanks land.

If I'm held north of Schwebo the 2 divisions worth of troops marching across the border from Chittagong will help unhinge the Japanese line and force them back to, roughly, the red line on the map - which closely follows the river.

Once that's in process I'll make the armoured landing in Southern Burma and dislocate that line without having to actually fully fight the forces there. I'm sure that this will cost far fewer casualties than the usual slog through Burma.

Currently I am in the process of buying all the US Armoured Bns out from CONUSA and am redeploying them, via Oz, to the Burma theatre. It'll take 2 months or more to get them all in action BUT the benefit will be that I should be able to put together an armoured Corps ( up to 3 division-equivalents ) which I can use to spearhead any advance into China and through the excellent tank country in some parts of China. Certainly I'll have more opportunity to take advantage of their mobility than in an island-hopping campaign.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/18/2013 4:15:09 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to desicat)
Post #: 131
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 4:17:52 PM   
Justus2


Posts: 351
Joined: 11/12/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

desicat,

Out of interest, what do YOU think the centre of gravity is and why? Anyone else can answer also obviously, I'd be interested to hear what people think. I know what I think it is but I also think most of you would probably disagree so I'm actually rather curious to see what others think.


Nemo, I'm not a big fan of identifying the COG as most times the effort fails (ball-bearings, the Republican Guard, Moscow, etc..) to identify the critical ASSET. The enemy has a vote and in an unlimited war (the answer is different in a limited war) they are forced to adapt and carry on to the current situation. For the Allies in WWII it was the political will to accept losses in the pursuit of unconditional surrender. In your game what would the Japanese have to deny to you to get YOU to capitulate? Nothing that I can think of. You have built in advantages that the Japanese do not such as an untouchable logistics base and an ability to accept losses that would have been politically unacceptable IRL.

So that leads to identifying your critical vulnerabilities in current game terms. The going in argument is that because of the game design Japan knows they are going to lose, its just a matter of time. This scenario seriously handicaps the Japanese economy making the holding of resource centers critical to his war efforts. He also needs to keep your strategic bombers away from the homeland industrial base or the resources sent in are of little value.




I would agree that COG analysis is fraught with peril, and all too often reflects too much mirroring of what would be important to us if we were in that position. But I think in some way your COG is similar to the Allies in the actual war, the political will to sustain losses at the tactical level to achieve strategic objectives. But as Desicat said, I think your tolerance is much higher than FDR (think President Stalin... ;) ). I would LOVE to hear the debates in your virtual House of Representatives, though!!

As for critical vulnerability, at this point (only a short while in), I would say it is your airlift capability. You have recognized the crippled state of the USN and particularly combat shipping, but you are adapting by using air transport to counteract that weakness. Not only your 'rapid reinforcement' plans for the Aleutians, but also your plan for the Airborne OMG in the Pacific rely heavily on the availability of massed air transport airframes ( a combination ofTR and PA aircraft, as well as bombers for supply it seems). While I have no doubt you have massed enough aircraft to support this, there is still a finite amount, and it comes at opportunity costs (presumably it reduces your recon coverage somewhere, although if you don't have a fleet to react, spotting the enemy isn't always that helpful.. ;) ). If Damien were able to significantly attrit these transport-capable airframes (LRCAP on objectives, bombardment of overstacked APOEs), he could reduce your strategic mobility and force you to re-evaluate your current plans. However, I don't think that is very visible to him at this point, I'm sure he expects some degree of air resupply in the Aleutians, but whether he will detect/recognize the massive scale I don't know, and the use in support of your Air Cav assault in the pacific shouldn't be visible until it is well underway.

I can already hear Robert Duvall stepping off a Catalina at Kwajalein saying "I love the smell of napalm in the morning, it smells like Victory!"



_____________________________

Currently Playing:
War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition (learning, not really playing ;) )
LST 325 Fanboy!

(in reply to desicat)
Post #: 132
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 4:21:40 PM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3736
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline
I partially agree with desicat in that there is no way to compel an Allied defeat/surrender early other than auto victory which is very hard to achieve. Japan can win late by denying victory to the Allies but even that is not victory in the "march into Berlin" sense.

However, I would say that the Allies most important and (relatively) limited asset is their ships, particularly carriers, surface combatants and specialized assault shipping. In the games where Japan has "won" you generally see a series of air/sea battles where Japan comes out ahead over the duration of 42-43-early 44, constantly pruning the Allied navies back to a point where it is difficult for them to advance quickly enough to win in time.

That said, I suspect Nemo, unlike most Allied players, would not concede even then. He would use unconventional strategies (airmobile campaign, ground war in CBI, whatever) to continue to advance. Thus, for Nemo I would argue his center of gravity is his own mental equilibrium versus the mental equilibrium of his opponent. Nemo's fearsome reputation can serve as a force multiplier in some respects. Getting over the mentality that Nemo is invinceable/unbeatable would be a key first step to defeating him, but this is a first step few are able to take because his games use very different thought processes and theories and feel almost alien to most players.

< Message edited by Cribtop -- 5/18/2013 4:28:23 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to desicat)
Post #: 133
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 4:52:07 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Very interesting analysis so far much of which I agree with, some not so much. I'll give it a day before I weigh in with my thoughts.

One thing I will say though is that the view that I'm insensitive to casualties has always struck me as strange. I plan my operations to achieve success with the minimum casualties possible - albeit that if an operation is worth losing 100 ships then that's what I'll do. Overall though its my firm belief that losing those 100 ships now in high tempo ops saves 200 or 300 lost in a long, grinding war. So, it isn't insensitivity, it is just a different mindset which looks at the strategic level and is willing to accept what must be done. To me its obvious that it is better to lose 100 ships in one go now than 300 ships ( and their crews ) over the next year ( all other things being equal ).

Bottom line though I think that some see what they want to see. E.g. People might look at the Aleutians defence and say - wow, he's throwing ships away there as though he doesn't care. On the other hand the objective reality is that my defence of Aleutians has achieved its objective at a tiny cost - I've lost 1 CA, 8 DDs and about a dozen PTs in return for 1 IJN CA and 2 DDs and the negation of most of the IJN battleline in the area. In the air I've shot down about double what I've lost and I've done all this without CVs and usually within 100 to 200 miles of the full strength of KB.


Before I left I came to the conclusion that since I didn't follow Western casualty-averse doctrines etc people fall into the trap of dismissing what was happening as " throw a horde at some place and if 1 guy's left standing then the horde wins" . This is the same sort of thing that has habitually been used to dismiss Chinese victories and Soviet victories when, actually, there's a lot of operational art and deep strategic thought going on.... but it is easier to explain as a horde effect than just the outcome of a very different doctrine.

quote:

very different thought processes and theories and feel almost alien to most players.


This struck me... I think this is a key insight. Obviously to me these things are just so obvious that I wonder why others don't do what I do but I think that, perhaps, its just so different to how most view things that, as with the Soviets and to an extent the Chinese, its just almost impossible for people to actually get their heads around the thought processes.... and it is easier for them to just simplify it as a horde coming in with little skill but huge numbers.... and then this leads me to wonder if this was the same effect which happened with the Germans looking at Soviet doctrine in WW2 and NATO in the cold war.

Each side views their own doctrine as being so obviously sensible that any other way of doing things is nonsensical and any success achieved must be due to other effects ( e.g. the weight of the horde ). To the Soviets the lack of willingness to sacrifice large units for strategic gain seemed really nonsensical. I really think NATO was in deep sh*t up until about 1983 and may not quite have realised just how differently things might have gone than they expected.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 134
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/18/2013 5:31:31 PM   
Justus2


Posts: 351
Joined: 11/12/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

One thing I will say though is that the view that I'm insensitive to casualties has always struck me as strange. I plan my operations to achieve success with the minimum casualties possible - albeit that if an operation is worth losing 100 ships then that's what I'll do. Overall though its my firm belief that losing those 100 ships now in high tempo ops saves 200 or 300 lost in a long, grinding war. So, it isn't insensitivity, it is just a different mindset which looks at the strategic level and is willing to accept what must be done. To me its obvious that it is better to lose 100 ships in one go now than 300 ships ( and their crews ) over the next year ( all other things being equal ).



I think part of the reason is that you take a long-range view, while there is a natural tendency to focus on the short-term results. One concept that I at least took a while to grasp in my military education is that moving up the levels of war from tactical to operational to strategic involves more than merely zooming out on the map, it also involves increasing the time horizon. Strategic operations aren't just designed to cover larger areas with bigger echelons of units, but should be designed to achieve long-term effects. I'm sure there are lots of reasons for this tendency, whether it is the instant gratification of seeing the objective taken, the carrier sunk, the flag changing on a hex, versus something less tangible like reduced fuel flows or, even less measurable, unused options that the enemy had (but hadn't used yet) taken off the table.

I don't know, it seems like the turn-based nature of the game reinforces that tendency, it is very easy to get sucked into the turn-by-turn movement of units (and loss reports) and lose sight of your long-term goals unless you deliberately step back and assess what progress you are making against well-defined strategic goals, that are not always visible in-game. If you are measuring the 100 ships against that standard, you can see if your price is 'worth it', particularly if you can visualize the cost of the 200-300 ships that might have been lost, but will never show up on a sunk ship list because of the choices you made. But if you are only comparing it to the enemy's sunk ship list, it seems like a much higher bill.

The 'sensitivity' and relation to IRL political considerations is I think a valid comparison. Stalin (or Mao) were not worried about running for re-election, or the editorial boards, so I think it was much easier for them (and their respective command structures) to take a long-term view to operations. Leaders in a democracy have a much more immediate field of vision. It is hard to sell long-range plans where you pay the cost up front, and the beneficial result will occur in your successor's term. Look at the criticism Patton endured, even though he was one of our most successful commanders. Imagine the press following Zhukov around. But it's not totally alien to the American way of war, Grant endured similar criticism, but Lincoln (having had enough of casualty-averse commanders, and being strong enough to willingly endure harsh criticism for most of his term in office) was willing to stick with him, because he could see the long term benefits.

_____________________________

Currently Playing:
War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition (learning, not really playing ;) )
LST 325 Fanboy!

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 135
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/19/2013 4:56:11 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3736
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline
I believe that most players are from the Western Allied nations, and the doctrines of those nations, particularly in a post-Vietnam world, are deeply ingrained. As Justus says, if you are an Anglo-Aliied-American commander, while it may be true that losing 100 ships today saves 300 tomorrow, you can't lose 100 today because the New York Times editorial page will take you out of the war. Even using pixeltruppen, we Westerners have this reality in our subconscious.

However, when you look at Nemo's games, you see that in general the enemy loses more than he does, and in fact his casualties are rather on the light side other than kamis in some of his Downfall/Armageddon games. But his willingness to suffer losses goes against our collective subconscious. This insight probably improved my game more than any other.

_____________________________


(in reply to Justus2)
Post #: 136
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/19/2013 7:51:20 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2186
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline
An interesting historical note is the political implications of Tarawa and how it created a serious issue for Nimitz (Congressman calling for his relief), and the subsequent impact on Allied tactial, operational and strategic operations for the remainder of the war.

Anyone who thinks that politics and military operations can be divorced is naive IMHO.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 137
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/19/2013 12:36:32 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
denisonh,

Well, I think that there are a couple of things to point out here....
1. Tarawa caused such ructions because there was a widespread perception what was gained was not worth the cost AND it was clear that casualties could have been lower with better prep and equipment.

2. The US public accepted far higher casualties elsewhere when convinced that the cost was worth it and/or it was clear that casualties weren't unduly caused by incompetence and poor planning.


In any case I think people are losing sight of willingness to accept casualties vs casualties. I'd happily stack the casualties I suffer in achieving objectives against anyone else's casualties achieving those objectives. After the last turn the total cost of defending the Aleutians has risen to about 1 CA, 6 DDs, 9 PT boats and about 80 fighters. In return I've downed more of KB than that, sunk an IJN CA and 2 to 3 DDs. I think no-one in the US would balk at those sorts losses given the massive disparity of forces in Japan's favour.


Hmm, the next day is very, very quiet. Some Japanese ships are spotted heading East towards Japan/the Kuriles. There are no naval or aerial combats at all. Ramree becomes a Level 1 airfield and things should progress relatively rapidly from there.

I am a bit worried that I've used small naval assets too successfully and that combined with his bombardments he has expended so much ammunition that he has decided to retreat from the Aleutians and land in the Kuriles. *sigh* It'd be ironic if that happened.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/19/2013 12:39:06 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 138
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/20/2013 7:57:39 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 2575
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

denisonh,

Well, I think that there are a couple of things to point out here....
1. Tarawa caused such ructions because there was a widespread perception what was gained was not worth the cost AND it was clear that casualties could have been lower with better prep and equipment.

2. The US public accepted far higher casualties elsewhere when convinced that the cost was worth it and/or it was clear that casualties weren't unduly caused by incompetence and poor planning.


In any case I think people are losing sight of willingness to accept casualties vs casualties. I'd happily stack the casualties I suffer in achieving objectives against anyone else's casualties achieving those objectives. After the last turn the total cost of defending the Aleutians has risen to about 1 CA, 6 DDs, 9 PT boats and about 80 fighters. In return I've downed more of KB than that, sunk an IJN CA and 2 to 3 DDs. I think no-one in the US would balk at those sorts losses given the massive disparity of forces in Japan's favour.


Hmm, the next day is very, very quiet. Some Japanese ships are spotted heading East towards Japan/the Kuriles. There are no naval or aerial combats at all. Ramree becomes a Level 1 airfield and things should progress relatively rapidly from there.

I am a bit worried that I've used small naval assets too successfully and that combined with his bombardments he has expended so much ammunition that he has decided to retreat from the Aleutians and land in the Kuriles. *sigh* It'd be ironic if that happened.

Another thing that shocked the US public about Tarawa is that for the first time press photographers were allowed to send in gruesome photos of wounded and dead marines, including dozens floating in the surf. They were trying to make a point about the horrors of war, not the incompetence of the planners. Heretofore shielded from such brutal truth [visually presented], the public were shocked.

I'm a little unclear on your comment about Japanese ships heading EAST toward Japan/Kuriles. From the Aleutians they would have to go WEST, no? Or were there some other ships near the Philippines that you refer to?

_____________________________

I have not yet begun to fight! OTOH I have not yet begun to flee. Hmmmmm - choices, choices -always with the choices.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 139
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/21/2013 3:51:43 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
BBfanboy,

Oops, I meant west, good catch.


13th September, 1942.
KB and the IJN are holding their distance about 250 miles from Attu Island. This has given me the opportunity to spawn more PT boats, refuel and resupply the ones which I cycled back to Adak Island and, generally, increase the number of PT boats at Attu back up to almost a dozen.

The DDs which were damaged in the initial actions around Adak Island are beginning to reach fully repaired status in Dutch Harbour and I have used them to:
1. Form a new fast DD TF suitable for dashing into and out of Attu Island ( 10 hexes from Adak ) within a single night phase and
2. To replace the most heavily damaged USN DDs which I had been forced to commit to BB escort - several of the DDs which I was willing to send into combat had system damage of between 15 and 20 so replacing them with DDs which have no damage at all is going to help these forces considerably.


I've also shifted my subs so they create a moving barrier 6 hexes wide and 4 hexes deep between the IJN elements and Attu Island. Ideally they'll sink some ships on the way in but, more importantly, they will sink damaged ships as they straggle out to Japan.


I think that there's about a 50% chance that Damian is going to abandon the attempt to invade Attu and, instead, counter-invade the Kuriles. If that's so then logistics will basically have allowed me to defeat about 1/3rd of the battleline of the IJN with just PT boats and the threat of the USN as a force in being.

Adak is now a level 4 airfield and so building the port up to Level 8 to support major operations has now commenced.


Oz:
I'm moving to threaten to dislocate the IJA line north of Katherine by moving across the river to the west of the road which the IJA forces have concentrated on. Once I'm across the river the IJA will have three choices:
1. Attack across the river southward hoping to retake Katherine whilst leaving a sizable force in their rear.
2. Pull back from the river to avoid my forces cutting them off from Darwin.
3. Moving west and extending their line westward and holding my forces in place there.

Either way I'll have my bridgehead across the river and have dislocated a great portion of their strength.


I'm removing 2 USAAF fighter squadrons, a B26 squadron an SBD squadron and 2 Banshee DB squadrons from Oz and moving them to India. That will give me 5 USAAF fighter squadrons in Oz to bolster my fighter groups and enough dive-bombers to pose a significant threat to IJN surface elements during the littoral campaign.


Burma:
Almost all of the RN elements have now reached Ceylon. In 2 days they'll be finished refuelling and can make the 2 day dash to Chittagong. So, in about 5 or 6 days I'll be ready to move significant forces south to Akyab from where they'll land fresh troops and engineers etc into Akyab - which became a Level 1 airfield today and should be a Level 2 airfield by then.

With the forces I have available I can afford to land about 40,000 men at Ramree with 20,000 men each in each of the jungle hexes between it and the plains to the south. These men will then march through the jungles with a view to entering the plains and cutting off the IJA elements trying to prevent a breakthrough from Ramree. The goal will be to break approximately 90,000 infantry into the enemy's western flank along the Ramree-Plains line + have an armoured spearhead of about 600 AV rushing across the plains and threatening the rail line between Rangoon and northern Burma.


China:
The redeployment is almost complete. My forces are a little strung out in their march columns but when formed up I'll have 1,800 AV in each attack force. One of the forces will make for Swatow ( where there seem to be about 5,000 IJA troops ) while the other will make for Amoy and then Foochow.

My plan is for the column which takes Swatow to leave garrison forces behind and then pivot westward to apply pressure on Canton and Hong Kong while the force which takes Amoy will leave garrisons and then move on Foochow.

When this operation is done I'll have 5 coastal bases in southern China and if the IJA wants to retake them it'll mean committing their strategic reserve. If they don't try to retake them then I can base the occasional bomber raid from these bases with a view to hitting trade around Formosa.

Either way I achieve my objectives. If something goes terribly wrong I can just withdraw into the interior and let him retake them on the cheap but have to garrison them ---- and I can always come back with another 3,600 AV and repeat the object lesson.

The two arrows show IJA movements. As you can see the forces at Canton etc are moving westward, a direction I'm happy to see them move in and cede to them as I want to reduce my lines there anyways and pull back to the river line south of Nanning --- a move I need to make in any case to reduce my lines due to taking most of the forces in this region away to form the bulk of the attacking forces aimed at the southern coastline.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 140
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/21/2013 8:53:58 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 4259
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

I think that there's about a 50% chance that Damian is going to abandon the attempt to invade Attu and, instead, counter-invade the Kuriles. If that's so then logistics will basically have allowed me to defeat about 1/3rd of the battleline of the IJN with just PT boats and the threat of the USN as a force in being.


That would definitely make the PT losses worthwhile. But I have to feel a bit disappointed that we won't see a fight with the IJN battlewagons low on ammo.

Did you ever get that radar unit up and running?

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 141
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/23/2013 12:57:53 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Yes, I now have about 8 to 10 radars there. The last 4 days of IJN dancing around Attu looking for an opening have allowed me to run in a few convoys and bring in aerial transports to Adak. The end result is that Adak now has about 650 AV and 770+ Engineers. Tomorrow it will be a Level 4 port. This means it has moved from a Level 0 port to Level 4 in 4 days!!!!! US largesse is pretty amazing once well-channeled.

As to the PT boats etc: Yeah its a pity that I won't fight the IJN BBs when they're short of ammo but I think the key to dealing with a game like AE is to have utter equanimity if things go well or poorly. "X would be nice but if it doesn't happen it'll be fine. If it does happen it'll be fine too." Once you get significantly emotionally involved in plans you stick with them too long and you can find yourself sticking with the plan even though reason or fingerspitzengefuhl says you shouldn't.

I've also air transported 2 additional regiments in to Attu Island so that island's defences have increased to 550AV other forces. Next I'm going to fly an Aviation Support force ( 90 AV, all airmobile ) in. These are the same aviation units which I'm using to staff the extempore Airmobile Division in the south.

I spotted KB sneaking around trying to get into my operational depth. It sank the new CL Trenton which was heading to Dutch Harbour from Pearl Harbour. That's the price I pay for playing without CVs. My convoys caught at sea will be defenseless but that's what should make this more challenging and interesting in the longer run.

Honestly, I still don't know if he's attacking Attu in the end or pulling back to invade the Kuriles. I think the odds are shifting in favour of the Kuriles, which is a pity. If he lands at one of them I'll just pull all my subs in and send them to bring supplies to the other. Whatever happens one of those bases must be preserved as a jumping off point.


Elsewhere:

South Pacific: I'm shifting newly arrived forces and logistical preparations to this theatre as I'm becoming more certain that the Aleutians can more than defend themselves against Japanese incursions. I'll be sending most oft he follow-on forces from prince Rupert into the southern Pacific also. It is time to begin wakening that sector. There are 560 AV of troops trapped behind Japanese lines on one of the Pacific islands. If I can relieve them then those troops can provide most of the island defence forces necessary to hold the islands my parachutists and marine raiders capture.


In Oz some of my forces have begun outflanking his river-line defences north of Katherine and he has, accordingly, begun to pull back. This is good. When I first played him Damian would have kept on trying to salvage this situation. Now he recognises the situation and abandons a position when it is no longer tenable. This removes most of my opportunities to exploit such positional advantages and is good play on his part.

Operation Sneaky has been discovered ;-(. Basically I was trying to sneak a division of troops into his strategic depth all the way up to Babo - which is level with the 2nd line of defences he has been developing in the DEI region. I got the idea when I realised his aerial recon out of Port Moresby was poor and Horn Island held a Brigade of Australians. Unfortunately I think Damian must have gotten a sniff of my forces when a sub stumbled over an AMC.

In any case I've occupied 4 bases along the western PNG coastline and while he is amphibiously invading Dobo I should have the opportunity to fly and transport more men into a couple of them. It'll only dislocate the first line of defence now, which is a pity, but there's a limit to what you can with the forces available when you take over in a game like this. Still, better than nothing.


Burma:
He is pulling the tank forces etc at Myitkina back through the jungle trails. He isn't even trying to fight through the British cutting the road back to southern Malaysia. This is, again, absolutely the correct call and its good to see he hasn't wasted any time making it. The position is compromised, this is the best play he can make at this time and so he has made it without complaining or looking back. Its nice to see, Damian has come a long way.

He is also trying to slip a raiding TF into my supply lines between Colombo and Chittagong. In response to this raid - which puts these forces out of position in terms of countering any movements to Ramree I'm sending whatever I have ready at the moment to Akyab.

At Akyab the plan is to unload my armoured forces while the infantry, AAA etc move on to Ramree while they will unload. The RN covering force will also move to Ramree. Then everything will pull back to Akyab and my forces will begin loading the armoured forces and the "string of pearls" forces for the littoral landings along the coast from Ramree.

This will take a few days to load and be ready to go in time for the timeline outlined in post 126.


China:
The ravening hordes have been spotted. They are each 46 miles from their initial objectives and there's no sign of major IJA reactions. Even if he starts reacting now I don't think he could slip in enough troops to make a difference. It really looks like I've achieved strategic surprise in this sector. Let that be a lesson to ever IJA player - In China you must ALWAYS have a couple of IJAAF or IJNAF recon units assigned to recon missions without objectives. They'll fly to random hexes and spot whether anything's there and give you a good sense of whether a strategic reserve is mobilising. Of course most players won't think of using the Chinese in a manoeuvrist way but you've got to play as though they're good enough to make that analysis, at least until the point in time when you've got their measure and can step down precautionary commitments to levels commensurate with their actual ability.



So, next week he should be decisively engaged by strong Allied combat elements along the coast and plains in Burma, should be forced back to Darwin by the manoeuvre of my inferior forces, will show his hand regarding either the Kuriles or Burma and should lose a couple of bases in China - leading to strain on his ability to maintain a strategic reserve. He'll mop up a couple of bases in PNG since the force correlation there is just hugely unfavourable to me and the forces I have aren't capable of a manoeuvrist solution. Ah well, a bit of rain has to fall on every plan.

So, all in all, its going largely according to plan.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/23/2013 12:58:28 AM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 142
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/24/2013 12:55:42 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Damian and I were swapping a couple of emails chatting about the game - the situation in China, how I crossed the river in Oz, his dancing around the Aleutians etc when it hit me.... I know why he's dancing around the Aleutians so much. He has probably sent his BBs back to Japan to reload their big guns. KB can still fly lots of sorties but his BBs shot their bolt so he sent them back to Japan to resupply while KB prevents any convoys from reaching Attu.

Or he's going for the Kuriles . But at least now I have an explanation which makes sense for his dancing around the Aleutians for the past few days.


In other news:
I think tomorrow will see an IJN SC TF hitting Akyab as he can see about 90 or so xAKs and xAPs gathered there guarded by an RN detachment. I'm pulling the xAKs out overnight and letting the RN stand and fight. I'm happy to accept attritional losses here to cover the littoral campaign.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 143
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/24/2013 5:10:32 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 834
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Currently I am in the process of buying all the US Armoured Bns out from CONUSA and am redeploying them, via Oz, to the Burma theatre. It'll take 2 months or more to get them all in action BUT the benefit will be that I should be able to put together an armoured Corps ( up to 3 division-equivalents ) which I can use to spearhead any advance into China and through the excellent tank country in some parts of China. Certainly I'll have more opportunity to take advantage of their mobility than in an island-hopping campaign.



How about moving Allied infantry there as well? Allied infantry can use strategic movement on major roads (there are many such roads in China) and can match the tanks' movement rate. Plus, if Allied infantry is interdicted during strategic movement it suffers losses but it doesn't revert to combat mode, it just keeps on going. Just reach Tsuyung's major road, change to strat mode and drive all the way to Shanghai with an American infantry division provided the road is free. Or use the unit as a "fire brigade" in China which can quickly redeploy via major roads to check Japanese breakthroughs.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 144
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/24/2013 8:45:17 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Yaab,

Yes that's been the plan all along. I outlined in my first few posts a plan whereby I'd drive overland from Burma into Thailand through to Vietnam and into China before pushing through into Korea with Allied forces ( the British and Indians etc ). This will include US forces although I'm not sure how many US infantry divisions as I presume most of them will be threatening to invade northern Japan and/or involved in invasions of the Philippines by that stage.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 145
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/24/2013 12:33:30 PM   
aoffen

 

Posts: 365
Joined: 6/7/2002
From: Brisvegas, Australia
Status: offline
Nemo
Re the planned Burma littoral campaign, can you land on vacant hexes with an amphib TF? I thought you had to land on a dot hex or is that just a house rule some use?
Regards
Andrew

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 146
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/24/2013 11:47:11 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Andrew,

Yeah we have no rule against landing in non-base hexes and I asked on the forum when the game was starting and was told that Michaelm has written code so that non-base amphibious landings suffer extra disruption and losses so, since that's modelled, I'm quite comfortable landing in non-base hexes.

Do I plan to do that a lot? Absolutely not. Its much easier to just mass a force and land it at the base itself but there will be the occasional situation ( such as wanting to secure supply lines to the OMG aimed at Bassein/Rangoon ) where it makes sense.


This leads me on to the question of Chinese troops. Damian asked ( and I was happy to agree ) at the beginning of the game that I'd have to pay PP for any unit moving from India into Burma or out of China. This means I'm paying PP for Allied units moving overland from India into Burma and really decreased the amount of force I can project into Burma. The exceptions to this rule are units which were already in Burma when I took over since I didn't want to have to pay PP for them since putting them in Burma wasn't my choice.

Damian, since then, seems to have gotten quite anxious about my Chinese troops and asked me recently about imposing limitations above and beyond paying PP on Chinese troops. Basically I think he was worried that once I paid PP for Chinese units he'd end up seeing them amphibiously invading Japan in 1944 or somesuch. I'll post what I outlined as my viewpoint ( and which we've agreed to ) here so people can follow along with the limitations etc imposed on my planning.

Basically I said that if he wanted those kinds of limitations then I'd be happy to limit Chinese troops bought out of China to areas which China has traditionally viewed as within its sphere of influence. So...
1. Thailand and Cambodia are both open to invasion by China.
2. Operations to clear Burma so the Burma Road delivers supply are clearly vital to China's survival and so Chinese forces can be involved in fighting in northern and eastern Burma.
3. China has a vital strategic interest in the Korean peninsula and so Chinese troops would engage in ground combat there once China had been mostly cleared.
4. Chinese troops could participate in any invasion of Formosa as that's viewed as a vital part of China.

Basically though Chinese troops won't be moving into Malaya, the Philippines or invading Japan proper. I might look into modifying that so the Chinese troops who were organised along US lines might form a Foreign Corps or somesuch but, basically, China will stick to winning ITS war against Japan and leave the world war to the Xirong, Dongyi and Beidi.


Damian has taken over a day to get this turn back. I think this means he is plotting some major moves... I'm looking forward to this as I'd rather like to bleed his forces a bit and get them to commit to something I can take advantage of.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to aoffen)
Post #: 147
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/25/2013 12:38:30 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
This made both Damian and myself laugh, USS Mississippi stumbled across an IJN sub which my ASW forces had mauled the previous day. The IJN sub was surfaced so USS Mississippi fired a single salvo from its aft 14 inch batteries and got a direct hit. Scratch one IJN sub.

One shot, one kill BB vs sub kill. Is that a first in AE?




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 148
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/25/2013 12:52:00 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5141
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

This made both Damian and myself laugh, USS Mississippi stumbled across an IJN sub which my ASW forces had mauled the previous day. The IJN sub was surfaced so USS Mississippi fired a single salvo from its aft 14 inch batteries and got a direct hit. Scratch one IJN sub.

One shot, one kill BB vs sub kill. Is that a first in AE?





(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 149
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/25/2013 2:13:45 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7159
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: online
I've had my ASW ships in a TF force a sub to surface and rather than face off against the DD, face the 8" shells from a CA. The sub didn't last long.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: No fleet, no problem... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   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

0.160