Jump to content
II/JG17_HerrMurf

Midway and Seaplane Tech

Recommended Posts

I'm not an SP guy but I can see how you could make a whole multi-chapter recon, torpedo, resupply, rescue campaign for a PBY really easily as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't and there were PBY's On the Eastern Front but Midway is the title of this thread.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't and there were PBY's On the Eastern Front but Midway is the title of this thread.

And so is Tech. I'm in it for the Tech. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In MP perhaps have it so a rescue of a downed pilot reinstates the downed pilot's score as well as earning points for the rescuer.

 

I think this would generate a lot of love for those doing the rescuing, and make it a very worthwhile endeavour.

 

Particularly if that very same pilot whos avatar is being rescued has already respawned and is heading out again to escort the rescue plane.  Just imagine how earnestly he'd do his duty if his stats were at stake.   :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are seeking parity, the H6K is much more the contemporary of the PBY than the Emily.

 

Indeed.  And I'm not sure that the Mavis is even slow enough to be a true match for the PBY.

 

An example:  When the H8K that was taken to the US after the war for study was being ferried from it's home base to the port where it was put on board a ship for the US (the last flight of an Imperial Japanese aircraft with an Imperial Japanese crew, BTW), it was escorted by a USN PBY.   The Emily had to fly a zig zag course because the PBY could not keep up with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice photos of the Po-2, there Murf. The Po-2 was built in large numbers and would be a great addition.
 
Also floats on the Ju-52... well cool, and hopefully we'll get them on the BoX Ju52. :cool:
 
 
Looking at that Soviet seaplane reminded me that the OS2U was used by the Soviets (IMAGE) in the late war. I recall reading that they were based in Murmansk, but I can't find the reference for that now. The OS2U was also used by the British and Australians. Adding in these types of aircraft (with skins to match the different nationalities) will add appeal. (I know there are some Commonwealth-fans who would love to fly aircraft in BoX under the markings of the old empire!) But types like this would also allow the aircraft to be used on Pacific, Eastern and Western fronts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In MP perhaps have it so a rescue of a downed pilot reinstates the downed pilot's score as well as earning points for the rescuer.

 

I think this would generate a lot of love for those doing the rescuing, and make it a very worthwhile endeavour.

Again, just an opinion, but I think this would change the overall game dynamics a little too much. My proposal rewards an additional play style and already contributes heavilly to the team score. I think reinstating an original score undoes "history" in a sense and could be seen very negatively by the opposing team. I'm trying to not create any controversy with the additional game mode proposal. It all just ideas here and yours was welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't miss anything thank you.

 

I'm actually on your side, but with the JU52 implementation fresh in mind, I don't share near your optimism.

 

I think the JU52 is awesome, and seaplanes would be too; but if they're not going to go all the way with them, I'd prefer they don't go at all.

 

Most of what you suggest would be fantastic.

+1

 

Can't see the ratio "required work/ people flying floats"  being  worthwhile for the game/devs, sadly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately that's true.  Just making the "aeroplane shape" and pushing into the store is a waste of time unless you actually include the specific gameplay to go with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we only get Jakes and Kingfishers, which seems likely, the suggested game mode is well suited for it.

 

Just need to make rescue for people/teams worthwhile by making it a high reward activity.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great ideas in this threat, and I would buy the RO-2 float plane in a heartbeat.  Might be a nice addition before going off to the pacific, test the waters (pun intended).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, here are some numbers....

 

Kawanishi H6K:

 

PBY 5A:

 

 

So, even the H6K is faster an better climbing than the PBY.    Range does not matter for our purposes as any map we have will never be enough to tax the maximum range of either.

 

And just for fun...

 

Kawanishi H8K:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My granddad flew quite a few planes in the 1940s and 50s. His main gripe with the romantic era were the terribly long flight times in the three most famous airframes at the time - the Catalina, Ju-52 and DC-3. Flying slugs, really, but elegant ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have Seaplane Operations for Pacific only?

Honest question from the uninitiated. How much air combat over water in Kuban and how heavy was the SAR effort by both sides to recover those pilots by air? In the Pacific both phases were significant. Boat rescue in the Kuban seems more likely in this scenario. I have no problem with SAR on the East Front but I also don't see float tech being developed by the Devs before Midway or we probably would have teasers about it already.

<p>

 

OK, here are some numbers....

 

Kawanishi H6K:

PBY 5A:

So, even the H6K is faster an better climbing than the PBY. Range does not matter for our purposes as any map we have will never be enough to tax the maximum range of either.

 

And just for fun...

 

Kawanishi H8K:

H6K and the PBY are close enough for our purposes to call it parity. The Emily is right out i'm afraid ;)

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Axis side, floatplanes were majorly employed in evacuations after all airbases had been overrun, and SAR for downed pilots (fighters and bombers downed to and from target, and anti-shipping bombers).

 

In the Soviet side, they were used for recon and armed maritime patrols, and SAR - the MBR-2 being the main hero for both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point worth noting though is that German and Romanian SAR services were mainly operated from Crimea and the Kherson strait (ie outside the Kuban map's boundaries). Soviet SAR operated off Kuban naval bases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

H6K and the PBY are close enough for our purposes to call it parity. The Emily is right out in afraid ;)

 

The H8K was still in the prototype stage in late 41/early 42.  In fact it's first, and mostly unknown, but most audacious mission, Operation K, took place in March of 1942, utilizing the first two prototypes, which attempted to bomb Pearl Harbor, flying out out of Wotje in the Marshall Islands, refueling by submarine at French Frigat Shoals (they had the range to do it without this, but they wanted to make sure their prototypes got back home).

 

They missed their target, the 10/10 drydock at Pearl, but the mission caused the US leadership much consternation, as they saw the aircraft coming on radar, but could do nothing about it, as there were no dedicated night fighters at Pearl, and radar coordination with the P 39s that did take off was still a long way in the future.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The H6K-Mavis and H8K-Emily were not produced in the same numbers as the PBY-Catalina, F1M-Pete or OS2U-Kingfisher.

 

It probably would make for sense to go for the common ones first. Possibly saving the H6K/H8K for a later Battle-of-Somewhere title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are seeking parity, the H6K is much more the contemporary of the PBY than the Emily.

 

 

Ye you are of course right, just a quick google for the sake of drama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

f8d711e6a541078206382555988b739d--flying

 

When I was young we had one of these PBY as firefighting airplane in Norway and I saw it in use as a 8 year old. I never forgot that sight. Later I went to see it in the Airfield many years after , and got to visit the cockpit. From then on I thought it was the most beautiful pit. I am not sure it is correct, but for me it is. I probably build myself a yoke if we ever get it that looks like it. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The H6K-Mavis and H8K-Emily were not produced in the same numbers as the PBY-Catalina, F1M-Pete or OS2U-Kingfisher.

 

It probably would make for sense to go for the common ones first. Possibly saving the H6K/H8K for a later Battle-of-Somewhere title.

 

Well, I can see where you are coming from, but the H6K was widely used by the Japanese, especially early in the war, and continued in service till the end.

It was their primary long range recce aircraft till the H8K came online in numbers, and hence should be the real counterpart of the PBY. 

 

And do remember that yes the PBY was made in larger numbers, but it was deployed in every theatre in the war.   The IJN flying boats only took part in the Pacific war.

 

The Pete and Kingfisher are both great birds, but they do not serve the same function as the PBY or Kawanishi boats, they simply don't have the range or capacity for that role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A PBY/H6K pair would do wonders in the Pacific, while the East would probably be better served by the MBR-2/Ar-196 if it came to that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And do remember that yes the PBY was made in larger numbers, but it was deployed in every theatre in the war.   The IJN flying boats only took part in the Pacific war.

Good point. In which case, I wonder what are the seaplane numbers relevant to Midway-ish area and time-period.

 

 

The Pete and Kingfisher are both great birds, but they do not serve the same function as the PBY or Kawanishi boats, they simply don't have the range or capacity for that role.

A quick look at Wikipedia gives ranges as:

 

F1M Pete              =   740 km (460 mi)
OS2U Kingfisher       = 1,296 km (805 mi)
PBY-5A Catalina       = 4,030 km (2,520 mi)
H6K Mavis             = 6,580 km (4,112 mi)

Obviously, these are approximate, but it gives a rough idea of what to expect.

 

So... what is the map size?

 

The Moscow map (which I think is the current largest) is 360 km corner to corner. Thus even the Pete could fly from one corner to the opposite and back. I wonder how big the Midway map will be?

 

 

A PBY/H6K pair would do wonders in the Pacific, while the East would probably be better served by the MBR-2/Ar-196 if it came to that.

Given the 8+2 planeset style of the BoX series, I would imagine more than 1-2 seaplanes in a given release is just not going to happen. I would therefore imagine having a short range light on one side and a long-range heavy on the other would give more diversity. A H6K / Kingfisher combination or PBY / Pete pair.

 

PS: The MBR-2 is gorgeous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as the F1M2 is one of the IJN aircraft that Jason has asked for info on I'm guessing that will be the first IJN floatplane scout.

 

And a fine choice it is too.

 

PeteHS.jpg

 

Pete and a KNIL Dornier...

Edited by BlitzPig_EL
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

 

Can't see the ratio "required work/ people flying floats"  being  worthwhile for the game/devs, sadly. 

 

Hard to do Midway without at least the PBY, it was just too pervasive in that battle to ignore.

So while not knowing anything for sure, from a logical standpoint you pretty much sign up to create the PBY if you decide to do Midway.

 

So while acknowledging other points made, I'll nevertheless be surprised if the PBY at least isn't present in the plane set.

...and also what Blitz just said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd pay $150 for an Emily.

I know I'm a minority in that department, and I know that won't get it made...I'm just sayin....


The Pete is a very good looking aircraft, IMHO.

 

It is.

Looking forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'd pay $150 for an Emily.
 

 

I would too. And another 150$ for the Catalina

 

 

 

 

Can't see the ratio "required work/ people flying floats"  being  worthwhile for the game/devs, sadly. 

There is no logic, if it pay the bill it will be done and I do think they will earn money on it. The PBY played a major part in the events in Midway it would be unhistorical not to have it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'd pay $150 for an Emily.

 

I would too. And another 150$ for the Catalina.

 

Yep. Me too. :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not get too crazy here. I'd pay fifty percent more than a Ju-52 to cover the cost of water landing tech. $150 ensures they won't move a lot of units to anyone other than PBY fanbois.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not get too crazy here. I'd pay fifty percent more than a Ju-52 to cover the cost of water landing tech. $150 ensures they won't move a lot of units to anyone other than PBY fanbois.

 

Nobody thinks that's going to happen, my original comment was made knowing that it's fantasy land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no worries.

I'd pay it, I just know it's not a plausible scenario.

Edited by Gambit21
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get all this Midway seaplanes idea. Leaving aside PBY which I'd like to see beyond any other seaplane (well, maybe except for H8K2 but thats not going to happen), F1M, E8N2 or E13A played minor role during events. Floatplanes would make A LOT more sense in relation to some island campaign, whether that would be Solomon Islands or New Guinea or Timor/Australia (like Ambon or Aroe Islands area). A6M2-N, N1K1 or H6K4 would be machines to go with. 

Besides, IJN had begun to change their seaplane-carrier/tender doctrine during 1942.  The seaplane-carriers (Chiyoda and Chitose) were withdrawn for conversion to CVL.  Increasingly, after June 1942, the seaplane tenders were only used to ferry seaplanes (and other supplies) and their air units became shoreline based and supplied.

 

 

 

In which case, I wonder what are the seaplane numbers relevant to Midway-ish area and time-period.

I've given those data in another thread. Based on Parshall and Tully, relevant numbers are as follows: there were no F1Ms in Main Body (Nagumo) force at Midway. IJN Tone and Chikuma both carried 3 E13A1s Jakes and 2 E8N2s Dave, IJN Haruna and Kirishima, each carried 3 E8N2s. IJN Nagara had one E11A1. The only Petes were present at Seaplane Tender group which was few hundred miles behind Main Body - Chitose had 16 F1Ms and 4 E13As and Kamikawa Maru had 8 F1Ms and 4 E13As. Plus Aleutian Force had a few. 

 

 

 

Obviously, these are approximate, but it gives a rough idea of what to expect.

Based on the document called "Specification and Performance of service airplanes of I.J.N." printed on September 10th, 1945 for Allies, based on original Japanese performance sheets it would be as follows:

E13A1 in normal configuration with 629 liters of fuel on board had range of 829 sm (I presume sm is survey mile) with flight duration of almost 7 hours at 120 knots speed, in scout plane configuration aircraft would be loaded with 1068 liters of fuel, giving it range of 1404 sm and almost 12 hours flight duration at 120 knots. 

F1M2 in normal configuration with 227 liters of fuel on board had range of 240 sm with and flight duration of slightly over 2 hours at 110 knots speed, in scout configuration it was loaded with 623 liters of fuel giving it a range of 578 sm and duration of over 5 hours at 110 knots speed.

H6K4 in torpedo configuration would be loaded with 9943 liters of fuel giving it a range of 2590 sm at cruising speed of 120 knots, in overload configuration it would be loaded with 10195 liters of fuel giving it range of 2700 sm and flight duration of 22.5 hours at 120 knots, finally S.O.L. scout configuration with 12,222 liters of fuel gave it range of 3283 sm and flight duration of 27 hours at 120 knots. 

 

Depending on size of map (makes me wonder how many resources ocean consumes) it wont be any problem even for F1M. 

 

Also, how exactly you imagine rescue operations with F1M ? It's observation plane, whatever space is not occupied by pilot or gunner/navigator, its taken by equipment and instruments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SM is statute mile (5280' per mile) as opposed to NM, nautical mile (6076' per mile). Knots are Nautical miles per hour. It's interesting the ranges are given in sm but the speeds are given in knots (nm).

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unusual because other documents I've found indicate nautical miles for Navy aircraft range. But sm is given in tables on each of four pages, so I dont think its typo. Perhaps that was US authorities request to provide this specific data in such unit. Who knows.

Edited by =LD=Hiromachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...