Ok, sell me the Pacific theatre planes.

[unreasonable]

While you have forgotten that a forest consists only of trees.

 

Revolutionary military concepts are things that armchair generals worry about. Actual military men shape their plans according to the material facts - or lose, badly. 

 

I am not even sure how a revolutionary military concept can possibly be brilliant, if it does not lead to success. No Nobel prizes here.

 

But enough of this, we shall simply have to disagree at this level of abstraction.

 

On the subject of Pearl Harbor... what on earth do you mean "Pearl Harbor was not about the attack"?  Carrier(s) sneak up unobserved, aircraft attacked ships in harbour, lots of damage done and ships out of action for a considerable period, reducing the enemies options. Seems a perfectly simple "concept" to me, the same in both cases. I will just post the beginning of the wiki entry here for the benefit of those who have no idea what we are discussing. 

 

"The Battle of Taranto took place on the night of 11–12 November 1940 during the Second World War between British naval forces, under Admiral Andrew Cunningham, and Italian naval forces, under AdmiralInigo Campioni. The Royal Navy launched the first all-aircraft ship-to-ship naval attack in history, employing a small number of obsolescent Fairey Swordfish biplane torpedo bombers from the aircraft carrierHMS Illustrious (R87) in the Mediterranean Sea. The attack struck the battle fleet of the Regia Marina at anchor in the harbour of Taranto using aerial torpedoes despite the shallow depth of the water. The devastation wrought by the British carrier-launched aircraft on the large Italian warships was the beginning of the ascendancy of naval aviation over the big guns of battleships. According to Admiral Cunningham, "Taranto, and the night of November 11–12, 1940, should be remembered for ever as having shown once and for all that in the Fleet Air Arm the Navy has its most devastating weapon."^[2]

 

Please tell me why the cases are so different. 

[Bearfoot]

 

On the subject of Pearl Harbor... what on earth do you mean "Pearl Harbor was not about the attack"?  Carrier(s) sneak up unobserved, aircraft attacked ships in harbour, lots of damage done and ships out of action for a considerable period, reducing the enemies options. Seems a perfectly simple "concept" to me, the same in both cases.

 

The relevant "concept" here is not "aircraft operating off carriers to attack ships. It is "coordination of multiple different elements for the projection of not just concentrated, but balanced force [from multiple different flight decks]".  In other words, integrated/organic combined arms. Interestingly enough, with a little bit of a stretch here and there, can be seen as one of the things that "blitzkrieg" introduced in land warfare. 

 

In any case, the suggestion that it is revolutionary is not (just) some fanciful pet theory of mine that I like to squabble over with people I don't know on the internet. It is put forward by Parshall and Tully on what is becoming, if not already, the definitive account of Midway ("Shattered Sword", pg. 86; emphasis on word "revolutionary" is mine):

 

"""

First Air Fleet’s establishment was a truly revolutionary [emphasis mine] development. For the first time in history there existed an agglomeration of naval air assets (ships, planes, pilots, and doctrine) that had the potential to create strategically meaningful results on the battlefield. The British and American navies had clearly influenced this development (the Japanese were keenly aware of the British carrier operation against the Italian fleet at Taranto, for instance). But it was the Imperial Navy that first established massed naval airpower at an operational level. By doing so, it had moved naval aviation out of its previous scouting/raiding role and transformed it into a decisive arm of battle.

 

The attack on Pearl Harbor represented the first clear-cut triumph of this new mode of warfare. And it is a simple statement of fact that in 1941 no other navy in the world could have implemented such a daring aerial assault—Kidō Butai alone possessed the combat assets and abilities to do so. Pearl Harbor demonstrated irrefutably that the Imperial Japanese Navy was no longer beholden to the West. It had clearly eclipsed the Royal Navy in terms of naval aviation and was in some ways more advanced than the U.S. Navy as well. This was particularly true with regards to integrating multiple aircraft carriers into a cohesive fighting force. 

"""

Edited September 23, 2016 by Bearfoot

[unreasonable]

The relevant "concept" here is not "aircraft operating off carriers to attack ships. It is "coordination of multiple different elements for the projection of not just concentrated, but balanced force [from multiple different flight decks]".  In other words, integrated/organic combined arms. Interestingly enough, with a little bit of a stretch here and there, can be seen as one of the things that "blitzkrieg" introduced in land warfare.

 

You have to put in [from multiple different flight decks] because otherwise there is no real difference between the attacks except for scale. Ground and ship targets were bombed and torpedoed.

 

Carry on reading about Taranto and you will see that the RN had planned to use two carriers but only had one operational, so that is what they used. Fighter cover? Not necessary, it was a night attack with no night-fighter defense anticipated. The covering force? What was considered sufficient to do the job: at Taranto CAs, CLs and DDs.

 

edit - I think your purple passage must have been introduced while I was initially drafting this:

 

Specifically, what on earth was the Taranto operation if not the "first clear-cut triumph" of this mode of warfare? It was extremely important strategically: it meant that the RN could no longer be beaten in a major surface battle in the Med. We all know that the IJN had reached a size and sophistication in carrier operations that no-one could immediately match, but this was not revolutionary. Just bigger.

 

As for integrated combined arms - introduced by "blitzkrieg" ?! - I give up. Integrated combined arms has been around since (at least) the Romans, sometimes done well, sometimes badly.

Edited September 23, 2016 by unreasonable

[Bearfoot]

I think we are straying off topic and derailing the thread not just in substance but also tone. I think I've said all I want to say to you on the topic. Basically, if this was part of an academic paper, I would summarize by: "The Japanese doctrine was revolutionary (Parshall and Tully, 2007)". And that's it. I think if the previous were to go before a reviewer, however, I would be dinged for not citing and discussing Peatie (2014; "Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-1941") in any analysis of the development Japanese naval aviation. Unfortunately, as I am just beginning that work, I cannot comment yet. It might revise my perspective, either reinforcing "Shattered Sword" or providing a counterpoint.  

 

Either way, though, if you want to continue this, please let us do this either over PM or in a separate thread, so as not to subject the good folks here to our squabbling.

Edited September 23, 2016 by Bearfoot

[deleted@31403]

I found flying over water ramps up the tension considerably.  Staring intently for that first sign of land or enemy fleet.  Or even more - engine failing and fuel running low, hoping for that first sign of a friendly carrier.  Coming out of a fight and trying hard to remember your last known position and climb back to altitude.  Trying to plot a course at the same time as you keep an eye out for hostile threats.  No forests rivers and towns as friendly signposts.  Pure airmanship and bird sense needed to get you home.  The final challenge of landing on and that first big exhalation of breath in relief as your hook catches the wire and you are safely home.  Then the big grin of satisfaction as you fold your wings and taxi to the forward elevator... 

 

I remember many nights with our squad AG-51 in Il2 flying a mission from our carrier with no land in sight. Navigate to land and execute the mission. Then used push points with speed and time to navigate back to the carrier. What a thrill to see your carrier task force appear in open water and land on the carrier. What a rush. I know if the Pacific came out now with carrier 25 of us in our squad would buy it instantly. It is what we dream of.

Edited September 24, 2016 by IV/JG51_TwoLate

[ShamrockOneFive]

I remember many nights with our squad AG-51 in Il2 flying a mission from our carrier with no land in sight. Navigate to land and execute the mission. Then used push points with speed and time to navigate back to the carrier. What a thrill to see your carrier task force appear in open water and land on the carrier. What a rush. I know if the Pacific came out now with carrier 25 of us in our squad would buy it instantly. It is what we dream of.

 

Coming soon enough (in flight sim terms ). I am hopeful that the future scenario change will pull in some folks now... but if they have to wait for the Pacific then that's fine too!

[Gambit21]

Yep - support needs to happen now.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Ships are coming 

 

 

I cant wait for Kuban and I cant wait for PTO

Edited September 24, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[Gambit21]

It's going to be so much fun Hiro - we'll have to figure out a way to fly at the same time.

PTO will motivate me to get online more.

[Sokol1]

Zeke x Wildcats.

 

 

That guy shooting at ~3:15 use Mr.X deflection techniques.

~4:30 "20 seconds rearm". 

Edited October 5, 2016 by Sokol1

[hames123]

Well, I think that the skies over the Pacific will belong to the Zeros. All the Luftwhinners and Hartman wannabes will fly Zekes for their axis ally. Or, they will all fly for the US as it is the first Western ally we have so far. I will fly as a torpedo bomber for whichever side has less players.

[Sokol1]

Or, they will all fly for the US as it is the first Western ally we have so far.

 

Only if  for a "secret" reason, US planes came "Uber/OP".   

Edited October 5, 2016 by Sokol1

[hames123]

Now why would that happen, I wonder?

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

All the Luftwhinners and Hartman wannabes will fly Zekes for their axis ally.

To be fair that wasnt the case on Zeke vs Wildcat. There were plenty of US pilots either. Also some Luftwaffe pilots requested adding 109s/190s for whatever reason, because they only and exclusively fly those aircraft.

 

Also, individual Hartmanning will be harder here since attacking ship formations requires groups. Personally I'd hope to see more organized team vs team gameplay rather than current individual hunting.  

[BlitzPig_EL]

My experience was that the guys with JG tags almost always flew exclusively for the US in Pacific scenarios, especially late war ones, because those guys always go for the "new best" plane, because it's all about their scores.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 IT is not about squad affiliation EL. Nobody wants to lose or fly "worse" planes. I have flown both allied and axis planes more or less equally even the squadron I fly with is basically a Bf109G-2/6 squadron. And people should drop this Luftwhiner etc. already, getting old like a broken record

Edited October 5, 2016 by LLv34_Flanker

[CUJO_1970]

Yeah, it's the "JG" guys that always go for the "new best" while benevolent mid-westerners make due with P-40.

 

For a decade all American kids did nothing in Il-2 but cry for the latest P-63 and over boosted P-51 on 150 grade aviation fuel, all the while insisting that P-80 was a real bona fide WW2 fighter. And then proceeded to fill servers with nothing but those planes, once they got their hands on them lol.

 

It's amazing what a lack of perspective or sense awareness will do for you.

[Feathered_IV]

My experience was that the guys with JG tags almost always flew exclusively for the US in Pacific scenarios, especially late war ones, because those guys always go for the "new best" plane, because it's all about their scores.

 

I noticed a lot of the players who flew the Russian side before Pacific Fighters would happily switch to the Japanese aircraft.  Oleg said it was because many of the eastern community like to shoot at the bourgeois planes, but didn't want to fly a fascist aircraft in order to do so. 

 

And people should drop this Luftwhiner etc. already, getting old like a broken record

 

Unfortunately there's good reason why it's got to be so old.

[BlitzPig_EL]

I flew Japanese a lot because I always fly for the side with the least players typically, and I also enjoy the challenge of flying the "underdog" aircraft.

 

I remember when the P 38 made it's first appearance,  It was too easy.  All you had to do was stay above 300 IAS and there was nothing the A6M could do but die.   Where is the challenge in that?

 

As to the constant push to get the proper late war boost/fuel for the Mustang, is it any different than the constant harping for 1.42 ATA in the 109, even though the F4 and G2 already handily out perform anything on the VVS side?

 

Not in my view.  It's just historical accuracy, and it should work for all the sides, not just the one you happen to fly for.

 

Flanker, I have great respect for you as a pilot and as someone who had been around for a long time.  I have seen you fly everything out there, equally well.   My comment is not a personal one, it's just my observation over the time I've been doing this.

You are correct, most do not want to fly the lessor aircraft, but, sometimes it is necessary, and often it is quite fun to do.

 

S!

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

My hopes is that there will be enough people (on both sides) around to get on TS and form a proper strike group. But that calls for at least 18 people if not more, since that would make 6 fighters, 6 dive bombers and 6 torpedo bombers. I have various manuals and documents on assembling strike group, coordinating attack and performing various attacks. Would be nice to try it out. 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I'll be there to make up the numbers when it's out, Hiromachi

 

The cruisers and destroyers in Kuban will help getting things started and in gaining experience with the diving part.

 

In the old Il-2 people still coordinate this via chat with reasonable success rates - assign a leader, explain the approach relative to the target ship, coordinate the drop and escort and that's that.

 

In BoS/M I've found that the best ground attack technique against a heavily defended target (and I've seen some attacks on docks with 4-6 gunboats happening without loss) is to send a pair of fighters ahead to fly fast parallel to the target at high speed to draw the flak. After that you get a decent window to execute mast top bombing or dive without being fired at.

 

That being said, if the Top Guns of the world sit around drawing contrails you can skip the escort and mass an attack group more easily.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

The cruisers and destroyers in Kuban will help getting things started and in gaining experience with the diving part.

Actually, that brings a question Lucas. What was standard AA armament of Soviet Fleet and are there any reports of its effectiveness during the war ? 

[LLv24_Zami]

I noticed a lot of the players who flew

the Russian side before Pacific Fighters would happily switch to the Japanese aircraft. Oleg said it was because many

of the eastern community like to shoot

at the bourgeois planes, but didn't want to fly a fascist aircraft in order to do so.

 

Don't want to fly fascist planes, good God... People should come to this century. War is over and this is a game. I despise communism just as much but it won't stop me from flying fine Russian planes.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Here is what Wiki says...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_campaigns_(1941%E2%80%9344)

 

The Russian navy had the heaviest ships, including one old dreadnought type battleship, and 5 cruisers.  The Axis had a mix of ships from different navies, the heaviest being destroyers of the Romanian Navy.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

People should come to this century.

Did that, got back with Pepparikakor (or whatever those ginger cookies were called), bottles of Koskenkorva and Fazer chocolate I wanted to try mämmi but couldnt find it in any shop around.

 

 

 

Here is what Wiki says...

That doesnt look good, only decent automatic gun is 37 mm AA on Tashken destroyer leaders. Else those destroyers and cruisers are only equipped with some semi-automatic 45 mm guns and Dshk 12.7 mm machine guns. Not that scary to be fair. Only thing decently protected is Parizhskaya Kommuna. 

[LLv24_Zami]

Did that, got back with Pepparikakor (or

whatever those ginger cookies were called), bottles of Koskenkorva and Fazer chocolate I wanted to try

mämmi but couldnt find it in any shop

around.

 

That doesnt look good, only decent

automatic gun is 37 mm AA on Tashken

destroyer leaders. Else those destroyers and cruisers are only equipped with some semi-automatic 45

mm guns and Dshk 12.7 mm machine

guns. Not that scary to be fair. Only thing decently protected is Parizhskaya Kommuna.

It's called piparkakku. Kossu and Fazer are fine but stay away from mämmi. It's terrible

Edited October 5, 2016 by Zami

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Most precious is always liquor. Thankfully I brought it safe home

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Pepparkaka Zami, pepparkaka.

[JtD]

That doesnt look good, only decent automatic gun is 37 mm AA on Tashken destroyer leaders. Else those destroyers and cruisers are only equipped with some semi-automatic 45 mm guns and Dshk 12.7 mm machine guns. Not that scary to be fair. Only thing decently protected is Parizhskaya Kommuna.

It looks better (or worse, from the aircraft attacking) if you don't look at pre-war but at mid-war equipment. Many of the ships received upgrades with modern 20mm and 37mm guns. The 7u destroyers for instance received upgrades to the likes of seven 37mm guns in place of the three 45mm guns.

[Gambit21]

And people should drop the Luftwhinimg already, getting old like a broken record

Fixed it for you

[LLv24_Zami]

Most precious is always liquor.

Thankfully I brought it safe home

Glad your bottles made it home

 

Lucas, it's Swedish but fine because it's second official language here :D

 

Sorry for OT, back to the pacific

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It looks better (or worse, from the aircraft attacking) if you don't look at pre-war but at mid-war equipment. Many of the ships received upgrades with modern 20mm and 37mm guns. The 7u destroyers for instance received upgrades to the likes of seven 37mm guns in place of the three 45mm guns.

I didn't know where exactly those upgrades were carried, but if it such an upgrade than it might be something worth seeing. Thanks for pointing that JtD !

[II./JG77_Manu*]

My experience was that the guys with JG tags almost always flew exclusively for the US in Pacific scenarios, especially late war ones, because those guys always go for the "new best" plane, because it's all about their scores.

 

[Edited]  NO POLITICS.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Bearcat

[Dutchvdm]

My interest lies mostly with Luftwaffe planes. But i'm also looking forward to Midway. Nice to learn new stuff and have something else for a while. Can't wait to fly the SBD or the 'Kate'.

 

Grt M

[Sokol1]

 

 

I flew Japanese a lot because I always fly for the side with the least players typically, and I also enjoy the challenge of flying the "underdog" aircraft.

 

But in the initial Bo'Pacific scenery - Midway, the Zeke will by the "underdog" aircraft? 

 

BTW - The "Flying Dragon' (Hiryu) in Midway CGI.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJs_J5jkxJY

Edited October 5, 2016 by Sokol1

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

But in the initial Bo'Pacific scenery - Midway, the Zeke will by the "underdog" aircraft? 

Who knows, but I'm nevertheless scared of gunners. With their accuracy CAP with a Zero will be a nightmare  

[[TWB]80hd]

Who knows, but I'm nevertheless scared of gunners. With their accuracy CAP with a Zero will be a nightmare

 

Gunner accuracy needs to decrease and bomber resiliency needs to increase... 

 

WarThunder is the gold standard for how to do this wrong, I truly hope that Bo(The Pacific whatever) doesn't follow in those footsteps...

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

True, WT is a prime example of how to make the things opposite to what they should be. But i'm not so certain about resiliency or at least not in regard to all bombers, Heinkel for instance isnt so robust and could see some adjustments. But Pe-2 is actually quite durable and even with single hand operated 12.7 mm machine gun it can wreck havoc on attackers. I hate attacking them even in my 190. Ju-88 is also quite hard to bring down. And both Pe-2 and Ju-88 are fast, making it hard to keep following them and attacking in such a way to evade gunner fire. 

[ShamrockOneFive]

Don't want to fly fascist planes, good God... People should come to this century. War is over and this is a game. I despise communism just as much but it won't stop me from flying fine Russian planes.

 

One of the things I learned was just how many people were fighting a 70 year old war from infront of their computer screen.

 

I think it's weird. I like to get into things but geeze... I fly everything on every side because I'm here for the awesome flight simulation.

 

Also wanted to say that while many players will only fly the "best plane available" (usually its the 109 or the La-7 back in the day) there are many of us out there who are very happy to be one of the  "crap plane" fliers. I went into some hilarious dogfight servers and did reasonably well flying some of the lowest powered aircraft available. It started because I was sick of seeing the same two or three aircraft but it grew into a challenge. Sure you can score 5 kills with the uber plane but score just 1 kill with the crap plane or even just survive. Also you could always take out the wonky choices like fighting a Bf109K-4 in a I-153P. It was doable if he was an arcade dogfighter and let his speed drop off. Or surprising a La-7 while flying a Ki-43-Ib. Honestly the more disparate these dogfight server plane matchups were, the better! :D

[Feathered_IV]

Don't want to fly fascist planes, good God... People should come to this century. War is over and this is a game. I despise communism just as much but it won't stop me from flying fine Russian planes.

 

By the same token there are lots of virtual-Germans out there who take it as a personal affront if they are required to fly anything with a star or a roundel on it.