|
Grey Hunter posted:What pools? At last, the Allied strategy is revealed: "They can't keep sinking our ships if they don't have any planes to sink them with!"
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
Might be a good idea to split your planes in Burma between Rangoon, Pegu, and Moulmein. Those three bases are close enough that CAP originating in one should be able to support another, and if they crater one airfield, it won't shut down your defense. Don't keep all your eggs in one basket, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:At last, the Allied strategy is revealed: "They can't keep sinking our ships if they don't have any planes to sink them with!" In response, Japanese high command decides to stop producing planes in order to devilishly foil the Alllies' strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:What pools? That's what I suspected. (Unless I'm misreading this and you're asking an honest question - in which case I was asking about your replacement aircraft pool, not pilots). This could hurt a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:That's what I suspected. (Unless I'm misreading this and you're asking an honest question - in which case I was asking about your replacement aircraft pool, not pilots). This could hurt a lot. If GH doesn't get his pools situation fixed, this is just the beginning of the overwhelming tide. In a couple in-game years the Allies will be capable of raiding with literally hundreds of planes at a time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:If GH doesn't get his pools situation fixed, this is just the beginning of the overwhelming tide. In a couple in-game years the Allies will be capable of raiding with literally hundreds of planes at a time. So GH has a couple IRL years to fix this, no worries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Ancillary Character posted:So GH has a couple IRL years to fix this, no worries.  Maybe in a month or two if we're lucky. Probably not at all. He's a busy man these days. It has to happen fast. And a good thing that, it's been getting boring watching him just win (I thought he'd lose the first Japan game, but that he'd win this one, but neither by so much).
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
He has been stemming the tide more then winning, if the invasions had not been disasters then maybe... But that's kind of the best you can hope for with the Japanese if you aren't gaming the AI.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
I never set out to game the ai. I like a challange and think sub optimal playing is more fun
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I never set out to game the ai. I like a challange and think sub optimal playing is more fun I'd hardly say you're making optimal use of your subs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I never set out to game the ai. I like a challange and think sub optimal playing is more fun GH speed runs WWII.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
   Liberators continue to hit our airfield.  Losses continue to be heavy.   I need to move these ships.   I'm shifting as many plans as I can out of Rangoon, its not safe there now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
The post in which we learn Grey finally has Kamikaze capability
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
   I hate the Swordfish.  After moving my planes, I activated them, and ordered some revenge.  There are only fighters and damaged airframes here now.  This plane was half dead before this.  This is a big raid.  That's dropped our plane losses a bit! And I'd rather be losing planes in the air than on the ground – at least that way they can be doing something.  I'm a little suspicious about this one!
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
whitewhale posted:He has been stemming the tide more then winning, if the invasions had not been disasters then maybe... Winning by points that is. GH, when you win the game in 1945 from double points most likely, or from points or nukes by 1946, will you hack the game to fight till the bitter end? I want to see how many carriers you can sink and A-bombs you can shrug off!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
Grey is probably not winning the game. It turns quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Grey is probably not winning the game. It turns quickly. He'll win in the sense that the game is 'won' by the Japanese player if they outdo the historical Japanese, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
   My subs do something, and hit a loaded troop ship!  The bloody Swordfish hits one of our ships.  We have to clear some Chinese from Sinyang, but crossing the river makes for an automatic shock attack.  Our planes have another go at Akyab, and get butchered by the Allied fighters.  Its time to put our guys back on the defensive I think.  We somehow bring down a Liberator. At this point I have to assume the shell hit the cockpit while the pilot had the window open making obscene gestures. I don't think anything less than that level of luck can hurt them.   This is a bit of luck as well.  Carrier! Carrier! Carrier!  A brutal day in the air, but the main thing is can I catch that carrier? I'm sending the Kiddo Butai out, but I'm only expecting a CVE – no point in getting over excited.  I think I win on this one!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Is that the first Hellcat we have seen?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
inb4 GH stumbles into a bunch of fully-loaded Essexes
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Oh boy. Hellcats. "Okay, the Wildcat's okay, but the Corsair's taking too long. Why don't we just shove a bigger engine on the Wildcat as a stopgap and see what happens?" *Destroys entire Japanese air force*.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Oh boy. Hellcats. There's no replacement for displacement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:There's no replacement for displacement. Dad?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:There's no replacement for displacement. I'm now interested in what would happen if we put modern performance car engines in WWII fighters. Or at least piston engine planes with car engines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
25 planes ain't many. Can you fly hellcats from a jeep?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Dreamsicle posted:I'm now interested in what would happen if we put modern performance car engines in WWII fighters. On a quick comparison, the most powerful car engine I can find is the 1,200 horsepower engine used in the Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super Sport, World Record Edition. The Merlin 61 engine used in P-51 aircraft could hit 1,580 horsepower. It is almost certain that improved engine design could result in more powerful piston engined aircraft, but just dropping a modern car engine in would probably not result in better performance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Dreamsicle posted:I'm now interested in what would happen if we put modern performance car engines in WWII fighters. Well for starters, they wouldn't fit, since car engines don't translate well to aircraft engines. But even if you could, they'd be hideously underpowered. The Bugatti Veyron, for example, is famous for having ~1000 horsepower. The Pratt & Whitney Double Wasp in the Hellcat makes about double that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Dreamsicle posted:I'm now interested in what would happen if we put modern performance car engines in WWII fighters. I'm actually studying piston engines right now so I can shed a little light on this. A common way of evaluating piston engines is the brake mean effective pressure (BMEP), which is the power per engine revolution divided by its displacement. Typical values for this are 6 - 18 (atm/bar), with 6 being more reliable engines and 18 being turbo race engines. Using the values in Wikipedia for the double wasp (and assuming the radial engines are 4-stroke) the BMEP is about 7 bar. The same calculation for the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport the BMEP is about 10 bar. So if a modern double wasp was made to the same performance per displacement as a Bugatti it would make about 2200 kW or 3000 hp. Looking at a max performance it could make 3700 kW or 5000 hp. (This motor would need to be rebuilt every 50-100 hours or so probably)
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
You'd have stupid problems with airflow, no?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Guys. We have turboprops now. Slap one of those on a bearcat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
You eventually run into the old problem of trying to avoid your props ripping themselves to poo poo whatever happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
I've always wondered what would happen if you just swapped jets in place of piston engines (where the airframe makes this structurally possible). I assume nothing good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:I've always wondered what would happen if you just swapped jets in place of piston engines (where the airframe makes this structurally possible). I assume nothing good. There was an early Yak that did that as a test plane if I remember, I don't think it went well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:There was an early Yak that did that as a test plane if I remember, I don't think it went well. As in it didn't function properly, or that they never found all the scattered bits and pieces?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-15 It just kind of sucked and was lame. The Swedes also had the Saab 21R, which was much cooler.  
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
goatface posted:25 planes ain't many. Can you fly hellcats from a jeep? Yes, but it was difficult and was only done occasionally, usually in "composite" groups where Wildcats and Hellcats were in the same squadron together. Wildcats were still better for jeep carriers because they were lighter and worked better with a jeep's short flight deck and lower sailing speed. The FM-2 model was specifically designed to help. goatface posted:You eventually run into the old problem of trying to avoid your props ripping themselves to poo poo whatever happens. Wasn't this a problem with the F-35 where the tips of the vertical fan engine were going fast enough to overheat?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
  I hope you crash on your way home you bastards.  I'm mainly interested in the large number of task forces to the south.  The enemy carrier hits our forces – I had assessed our battleship to damaged to risk at the high seas, so she has done a good amount of damage before this happened. A true hero of the navy!  Our carriers catch some loaded troopships on their way down to hunt the enemy carrier.  I need to kill that carrier now. For honour!  So far only the cruiser is down.  Still alive, and less badly damaged than I remember.  Our troops sneak in and take another base deep in China.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
28 June 1943 Italian cruiser Bari, sunk in Livorno Harbor by US aircraft. Bari had an interesting history, originally being ordered by the Imperial Russian navy from the German Shichau-Werke yard (shout out to the SW folks from TriggerHappyPilot's RTW LP) in 1913 under the name Maraviev Amurskyy. Launched shortly before the outbreak of World War I, she was instead commissioned into the German navy as SMS Pillau along with her sister SMS Elbing. A veteran Jutland, among other battles, Pillau was ceded to Italy as a war prize in 1920 and modernized in the early '30s. During World War II, she supported Italian forces in and around Greece with shore bombardments. At the time of her sinking, she was scheduled to be converted to an antiaircraft ship.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
I see that battleships are continuing their sterling record as mobile reef production vessels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
Poor Agano. Such a pretty boat. Not a useful boat, but pretty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:08
|
|