Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

carrier trained

 
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 >> The War Room >> carrier trained Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
carrier trained - 10/18/2020 7:24:32 AM   
LGKMAS

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 4/25/2010
Status: offline 		Looking at my carrier capable force and my carrier trained force, I notice that I have no USN air units that are NOT carrier trained, in late 1942. Most of the USMC air units seem carrier capable but not carrier trained. Looking ahead a few months and that seems to be the norm, USN are carrier trained and USMC are not.
Given that the CV, CVL and CVE seem to be coming on line with carrier Trained air units, is there any need for me to remove a perfectly good carrier trained unit from a carrier for 90 days in order to train up a USMC air unit to operate from a Carrier? I note that apparently they can be loaded on a carrier and operate although with Operational losses. So I can load a USMC air unit on a carrier and transport it to the local island and fly off without anything than a few operational losses.
Views and opinions? Or have I missed something?
Post #: 1
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 10:55:17 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 9395
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: online 		The operational losses would come from missions on the carrier, not transporting them and flying them off.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to LGKMAS)
Post #: 2
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 12:41:33 PM   
btd64


Posts: 7585
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: offline 		I sometimes load up a Marine fighter unit just to have the extra fighters on board. Bringing the number of aircraft on board to around 98 or so. But at the date your at, the squadron size would be around 12 planes. Although that is still a bonus....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

I don't like paying for the same real estate twice..Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 3
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 1:15:20 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16137
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

The operational losses would come from missions on the carrier, not transporting them and flying them off.

That's part of the loss issue - CAP is a mission. ASW is a mission. Nav Search is a mission. Yet parking them on the carrier for three months seems a bad option - no experience gains for the pilots and increased losses if you lose the carrier to SCLS...

The ops losses are not that heavy unless you send the aircraft on long missions near their range limit, so I find it best to just limit their range for a while and fly some training that increases their overall experience. The latter is easy to do for bombers because you need ASW and Nav Search patrols and can do an occasional Recon while on a hit-and-run raid. Fighters can do some LowG or LowN on occasion and Strafe where you have isolated an enemy base for target practice.


_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 4
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 1:18:51 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 9395
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: online 		Any CAP/LRCAP flown over 2 hexes increases OPs losses if I remember correctly.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 5
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 1:23:11 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16137
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Any CAP/LRCAP flown over 2 hexes increases OPs losses if I remember correctly.

Because flying in circles makes the pilots dizzy or because it's hard on the ailerons and rudder? The world wonders ...

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 6
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 1:42:14 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 9395
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Any CAP/LRCAP flown over 2 hexes increases OPs losses if I remember correctly.

Because flying in circles makes the pilots dizzy or because it's hard on the ailerons and rudder? The world wonders ...


I got an engine problem, I need to return to base. Ooooppppssss! I ran out of air . . .

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 7
RE: carrier trained - 10/18/2020 2:02:56 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2517
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS
is there any need for me to remove a perfectly good carrier trained unit from a carrier for 90 days in order to train up a USMC air unit to operate from a Carrier?

No, there is no need. Operational losses from "Carrier capable but not trained" are negligible, so you can just forget about the status

(in reply to LGKMAS)
Post #: 8
RE: carrier trained - 10/19/2020 4:28:20 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 6789
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline 		+1

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 9
RE: carrier trained - 10/19/2020 7:02:13 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 2719
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Sydney
Status: online 		In most scenarios, all carriers come with associated air-groups. Additionally you get some extra USN & FAA airgroups, so if you want to offload some replenishment groups, and use those late war CVEs operationally, you have some to use. Added to that, when your carrier gets sunk, you can buy back the air wing (you might want to send any leftover fragments back to SFO to join up with them later).

So, basically, there is no need for carrier training VMF/VMSB squadrons. Having said that, putting some (small) VMSB squadrons on RN carriers can be useful.



_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 10
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 4:41:59 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 9395
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: online 		You can use the fragments as is but they will not take replacements or fold them into another air unit of the same nationality and air frame.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 11
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 9:59:45 AM   
LGKMAS

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 4/25/2010
Status: offline 		Ian r,
thank you. That does make some sense. I have now gone deep into the late war CVEs and found some that come without air groups, or at least I have not found any groups linked to those CVEs. Maybe I have not looked hard enough?
So late war a number of CVEs turn up without attached air groups. That may be a reason to start putting none carrier trained air units on rear area CVEs so that 90 days later they can become operational air units.
Just a bit down the track for me at the moment but I now have flagged this as a possibility later in the war.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 12
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 12:32:20 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 2719
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Sydney
Status: online 		Depends on the scenario, and I don't know what you are playing, but you shouldn't need many, and you shouldn't need carrier trained VMFs in 1942 - the first Corsair model is not carrier capable, and you want plenty of those down south in the hot zone in late 1942.

I suggest you open the scenario in the editor - there is a panel on right of the ships data base screen which tells you which air groups are attached to each ship. I am surprised you are seeing CVEs without groups on board, but this is a scenario specific thing.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to LGKMAS)
Post #: 13
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 12:54:26 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 9395
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: online 		Those CVEs later had Marine air units on them. Early on, it is a good idea to let the Devastators units train since you will need more Avenger pilots later when new air units come in as well as resizing air units. So put the torpedo bombers ashore and tran some Marine fighter units on your carriers for more defence, although you do need to keep them on for 90 days to be carrier qualified.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 14
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 1:47:54 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16137
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Those CVEs later had Marine air units on them. Early on, it is a good idea to let the Devastators units train since you will need more Avenger pilots later when new air units come in as well as resizing air units. So put the torpedo bombers ashore and tran some Marine fighter units on your carriers for more defence, although you do need to keep them on for 90 days to be carrier qualified.

In case it has not been mentioned before, the 90 days can be interrupted and will resume when the unit is reloaded on a carrier.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 15
RE: carrier trained - 10/22/2020 6:55:55 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 2719
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Sydney
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Those CVEs later had Marine air units on them. Early on, it is a good idea to let the Devastators units train since you will need more Avenger pilots later when new air units come in as well as resizing air units. So put the torpedo bombers ashore and tran some Marine fighter units on your carriers for more defence, although you do need to keep them on for 90 days to be carrier qualified.


A reasonable temporary idea, except for the fact you don't get all the historically available F4F-4s in the stock scenario (another thing which is scenario dependent) so your marines are driving Buffalos. Although performance wise, F2As aren't too shabby a in the early days. In fact, apart from their short legs, Sea Hurricanes are faster and more maneuverable, and have a similar service rating to the early USN models. There is an FAA squadron from Canadia that drops off the Indomitable that helps cure the fighter shortage. Not to mention that the Albacore is a more capable platform than the TBD - and the torpedoes work.

But all this micro-managing is ultimately unnecessary - in late 1943 you look back with a certain nostalgia at this finger nails on the cliff phase, while you hold back carriers from ops to train the air groups.

_____________________________

"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock


Ian R

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 16
RE: carrier trained - 10/23/2020 5:34:28 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 6789
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Not to mention that the Albacore is a more capable platform than the TBD


What isn't?

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> carrier trained Page: [1]
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

0.137