A look ahead to the Pacific

[BSS_Vidar]

Looking forward to flying from Carriers again - its been way too long!!!

 

Something to share with developers. This man has more time flying Zeros than any Japanese pilot in WWII.

 

Please take note of when the Zero is most effective at specific speeds, and when it is completely ineffective at other speeds.

 

Take note of is comments about the superior roll rate... watch his hands.. they go left. To the right, the Zero had a terrible a roll rate due to a 1,200 HP engine torque on a VERY light airframe. he doesn't explain this.

 

While the rudder maintained full effectiveness at all speeds, the ailerons lost effectiveness at speed at and above 200kts. The elevators suffered severe compressibility at and above 250kts. This gentleman gives a "blanket speed" of 220kts for both control surfaces.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmUseKNrh6Q

 

Enjoy this gent's extended experience flying a real Zeke!

 

S!

 

V

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

Excellent video ty.

It had better aileron and elevator authority in Pacific fighters, than this pilot mentions though :-)

 

Cheers

[BSS_Vidar]

Yup.. The Zeke's FM in Pacific Fighters/1946 allowed players to use U.S. Boom-n-Zoom tactics when the airframe clearly should NOT be able to.

 

There are post war reports that Zeke's thought to be Kamikaze, were actually pilots in distress in complete compression of flight controls.

 

The most used U.S. tactic to evade Zekes, and other Japanese aircraft, was to roll right and dive.

 

This was completely pointless in PF/'46 due to the Zeke's FM.

 

V

[Gambit21]

Yeah Zeke was over-modeled a bit.

Impotent Oleg .50 cals didn't help either.

[Archie]

I think the worry must be that if one hit makes a Zero flame like a torch, just how many people will want to fly it. I enjoyed flying it in the old game, but knew the chances of landing again after take off were very slim!

Edited October 30, 2017 by Archie

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

1200 HP? According to multiple sources the late war Sakae developed a maximum 1130'ish at altitude. Early war was around 940.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I think the worry must be that if one hit makes a Zero flame like a torch, just how many people will want to fly it. I enjoyed flying it in the old game, but knew the chances of landing again after take off were very slim!

I don't think it's an issue. The MiG-3 and Bf-109 suffer from often catastrophic engine/cooling/lubrication damage from almost all hits outside of the tail section thanks to the cramped placing for example. It doesn't stop either from getting love.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

OK, watched the video. He says 1250 horsepower but it has been re-engined with a Pratt and Whitney motor. As far as I know the only Zero flying with an original engine is the Planes of Fame AC.

 

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=712Z

Edited October 30, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Gambit21]

I think the worry must be that if one hit makes a Zero flame like a torch, just how many people will want to fly it. I enjoyed flying it in the old game, but knew the chances of landing again after take off were very slim!

For starters, you have to hit it first.

Second, the devs are not going to present us with an aircraft where every hit anywhere lights it up:

It wasn't that way in reality either - don't worry so much.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It is. Legend Flyers A6M3 model 32 was supposed to have Sakae as well, but they gave up on that and shoved their P&W. So for all intends and purposes the only 100% representative Zero is the one in Chino. And sidenote, Sakae 21 would give about 1200 HP on emergency power around 8000 ft.  

 

Also, Pacific Fighters A6M was both over and under performing. It was a mix of overmodeled features and undermodeled ones. Il-2 was just that way, pretty much with most other fighters as well. Call it technology, Oleg bias or whatever. 

[Heliopause]

[VesseL]

Yes. When i look ahead to the Pacific, i think i see... some "lite editions".... possible many good candidates for a lite editions.

 

 

 

Lite editions is not my idea but i like the idea a lot. Hope the devs think so too. ShamrockOneFive said it in the other thread. If i can i will quote his post here:

 

His post: 

"Still hoping that maybe with a third party the devs can produce a kind of "Battle of Odessa" lite edition with the I-153 and a SB-2 at some point in the future as Collector Planes (the map would be free). That list could rapidly expand but given what we already have it could be an interesting scenario to add to the mix."

Edited October 30, 2017 by VesseL

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Pacific will certainly be very interesting thanks to the naval setting. It will be nice to finally have carrier operations in a modern simulation.

 

Modded 46 has some nice naval features, but the overall software is really showing its age now. Hopefully the upcoming release will give us an amazing Pacific product. 

[DD_Arthur]

Pacific will certainly be very interesting thanks to the naval setting. It will be nice to finally have carrier operations in a modern simulation.

 

Modded 46 has some nice naval features, but the overall software is really showing its age now. Hopefully the upcoming release will give us an amazing Pacific product. 

 

Yep, couldn't agree more

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Yup.. The Zeke's FM in Pacific Fighters/1946 allowed players to use U.S. Boom-n-Zoom tactics when the airframe clearly should NOT be able to.

 

V

You should tell that to all those Japanese aviators that used hit and run tactics in 1942 against Wildcats. They would be surprised as hell to learn that they did something impossible with their airframe. 

 

But to further explain this, I should say that both sides tried to get altitude and energy advantage if they could, sometimes one gained the advantage, sometimes the other. As of late 1942, USN intelligence reports noted that it was the Zeroes who tended to use boom and zoom tactics versus the F4F. That was really unsurprising, for this was the Zero's standard tactic in combat over China in pre-Pacific War, when it was faster than all its opponents. IJN pilots sometimes fell back on earlier individual aerobatic tactics, but the IJN's official doctrine based on experience in China emphasized cooperative quick firing and break away passes by the 3 plane 'shotai'. Their coordination skills were to be honed by such intense training that they didn't need radios to anticipate one another's moves, and that worked with the highly trained 1942 (and actually, 1943 to a still significant extent among those who remained alive to that time) IJN pilots. I highly encourage you to read John Lundstorm First Team. Examples of such events are noted there and it is clear that combat did not look like most people imagine it did. 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFgfYi27JN0

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnlph1jX9rA

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ86xKwgdos

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

[sinned]

You should tell that to all those Japanese aviators that used hit and run tactics in 1942 against Wildcats. They would be surprised as hell to learn that they did something impossible with their airframe.

 

But to further explain this, I should say that both sides tried to get altitude and energy advantage if they could, sometimes one gained the advantage, sometimes the other. As of late 1942, USN intelligence reports noted that it was the Zeroes who tended to use boom and zoom tactics versus the F4F. That was really unsurprising, for this was the Zero's standard tactic in combat over China in pre-Pacific War, when it was faster than all its opponents. IJN pilots sometimes fell back on earlier individual aerobatic tactics, but the IJN's official doctrine based on experience in China emphasized cooperative quick firing and break away passes by the 3 plane 'shotai'. Their coordination skills were to be honed by such intense training that they didn't need radios to anticipate one another's moves, and that worked with the highly trained 1942 (and actually, 1943 to a still significant extent among those who remained alive to that time) IJN pilots. I highly encourage you to read John Lundstorm First Team. Examples of such events are noted there and it is clear that combat did not look like most people imagine it did.

This is gold. Knowledge in IJN is truly second to none.

 

 

About Pacific, Rainy Aluetian campaign is going to be so awesome.

[Gambit21]

I wouldn't hold my breath on the Aleutians.

[Field-Ops]

Why would you think the Aleutians is a no-go? I mean its basically Battle of Midway: the second half. And its the only way youl get the P40 to be useful in that theater for the time period. And its the only way youl get the B26 marauder. And its the only way youl get the A-20 B to be a shoe-in, And its the only way youl get the P39 to be a shoe-in. 

 

That is if they actually do go for Midway and dont go to the Solomons like Jason mentioned.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Field-Ops

[Gambit21]

Why would you think the Aleutians is a no-go? I mean its basically Battle of Midway: the second half

 

Because there are much better 'bang for the buck', historically pivotal and relevant options.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Why would you think the Aleutians is a no-go? I mean its basically Battle of Midway: the second half. And its the only way youl get the P40 to be useful in that theater for the time period. And its the only way youl get the B26 marauder. And its the only way youl get the A-20 B to be a shoe-in, And its the only way youl get the P39 to be a shoe-in.

 

That is if they actually do go for Midway and dont go to the Solomons like Jason mentioned.

I don’t think Jason was contemplating Solomons as a substitute to Midway. I understood it was being loosely considered for Okinawa. Midway is a go. I’d be shocked if the map makers aren’t at least knee deep in their research already. Possibly more..... Edited October 31, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Field-Ops]

I don’t think Jason was contemplating Solomons as a substitute to Midway. I understood it was being loosely considered for Okinawa. Midway is a go. I’d be shocked if the map makers aren’t at least knew deep in their research already. Possibly more.....

Thats more comforting to hear, I'd already set my sights on those Wildcats, Dauntless and Zekes and was a little worried when I interpreted that as a "replacement for Midway"

[Gambit21]

Just FYI - Solomons is Wildcats, Dauntless' and Zekes.

[Field-Ops]

True, but do you think the team will have the budget to make full fledged carrier ops along with a new map instead of an island? I dont mean to downplay the teams capabilities in this regard. 

[sinned]

I wouldn't hold my breath on the Aleutians.

I want you to go and start making a dynamic campaign based on Aluetian islands.

 

Persistent and changing front lines and destroyed objects are must.

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

 

 

You should tell that to all those Japanese aviators that used hit and run tactics in 1942 against Wildcats. They would be surprised as hell to learn that they did something impossible with their airframe.

Not to forget Jimmy Flatleys words, nothing dives with a Wildcat.

 

Mj

[Gambit21]

True, but do you think the team will have the budget to make full fledged carrier ops along with a new map instead of an island? I dont mean to downplay the teams capabilities in this regard.

 

I can't speculate - just wanted to clarify that the plane set is nearly identical.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Not to forget Jimmy Flatleys words, nothing dives with a Wildcat.

 

Mj

Which doesnt contradict what I've said. Wildcat had higher Vne and past a certain point it had superior dive acceleration. 

 

But idea that Wildcats will only be fighting in superior energy situations is wrong. Considering superior climb rate of the Zero I suspect lots of times Wildcats will fight in altitude / energy disadvantage. Then what ? Dive and run away ?

In reality during multiple combats that occured in 1942, lots of time Wildcats fought at height disadvantage yet still managed to score better than comparatively superior aircraft such as P-40 or P-39. That says a lot of Navy and Marine pilots, but also makes you think what Wildcat could and should do if such situation occurs in our online dogfight. For one I remember from Lundstorm book that Wildcats could turn pretty well, not as well as Zeros obviously, but still quite well so that they could dodge if need be.

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

 

 

Which doesnt contradict what I've said. Wildcat had higher Vne and past a certain point it had superior dive acceleration.

Agree!

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Lol map research for Midway? I think that could be done in an afternoon, no joke.

[A_radek]

Lol map research for Midway? I think that could be done in an afternoon, no joke.

Winter navigation can be cruel. This will be on another level once you've lost track of your mates and position after a chaotic encounter.

[Feathered_IV]

I'm looking forward to the Pacific chapter.   I hope the devs include some extra maps other than Midway however, to extend the options of gameplay.  A chunk of the area surrounding Rabaul for example would not be difficult compared to the maps we have now.  Or even a large stretch of empty sea would also help for hunter\killer encounters.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

The closest I've come to getting a really good look at an AM6 was at the Imperial war Museum in London. It was mostly just the fuselage, cockpit and sections of wing. I have to say the aluminium alloy skin looked paper thin. I certainly wouldn't want to be on the receiving  end of any 50 cals flying in that old girl.  

[ElPerk]

Winter navigation can be cruel. This will be on another level once you've lost track of your mates and position after a chaotic encounter.

Yeah, this will be absolutely horrendous at first. The op losses, they'll keep mounting :D Finding a target without a GPS marker will be a blast.

 

Hiromachi, how was the radio beacon equipment in IJN/USN planes during Midway?

[SvAF/F19_Klunk]

Roaring Glory Warbirds have a A6M5 video where they testfly the bird... I saw it many years ago on Youtube, but I can only find a summary for the dvd now.

These guys made really interesting videos on warbirds, testflying them

 

here is the one for the P40E

Edited October 31, 2017 by SvAF/F19_Klunk

[CIA_Yankee_]

Which doesnt contradict what I've said. Wildcat had higher Vne and past a certain point it had superior dive acceleration. 

 

But idea that Wildcats will only be fighting in superior energy situations is wrong. Considering superior climb rate of the Zero I suspect lots of times Wildcats will fight in altitude / energy disadvantage. Then what ? Dive and run away ?

In reality during multiple combats that occured in 1942, lots of time Wildcats fought at height disadvantage yet still managed to score better than comparatively superior aircraft such as P-40 or P-39. That says a lot of Navy and Marine pilots, but also makes you think what Wildcat could and should do if such situation occurs in our online dogfight. For one I remember from Lundstorm book that Wildcats could turn pretty well, not as well as Zeros obviously, but still quite well so that they could dodge if need be.

 

From my understanding, the Wildcats started to do better when they stopped trying to dogfight the Zeros. They either engaged when they had superiority (high alt, and so on), refused engagement when they did not have the advantage (which, quite frankly, is generally the wise thing to do in general regardless of your airframe), or when they did fight they refused to dogfight them in the traditional way... and this is where things like the Thach Weave came in: instead of trying to outmaneuver the Zero going after them, they went after the Zero attacking their wingmen.

 

Granted, how well that will translate in multiplayer, where only a few players are actually coordinated and working as a team, is difficult. I anticipate a tough time for the USN solo players.

 

And, of course, no amount of Thach Weaving will help when the IJN pilots focus on boom and zoom. As you wrote, it will be easier for them to achieve E superiority.

 

I guess that the situation, as far as airframes go, isn't THAT different from eastern front scenarios, where one side has a clear superiority.

 

Oh well, I for one am very much looking forward to it. Carrier Ops are going to be great.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Lol map research for Midway? I think that could be done in an afternoon, no joke.

Midway will probably be the only map in EA along with four to five basic ship types for each side. I doubt, however, it will be the only map upon full release.

 

This is probably where I repeat my shameless plug for a Hawaii/Pearl Harbor map again.......................but I won't.

Edited October 31, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Hiromachi, how was the radio beacon equipment in IJN/USN planes during Midway?

All Zeros were equipped with Homing Direction Finder and Carrier Wave Transmission with telegrapher key. Or to be specific: Type 96 ku (aviation) Model 1 (for single seat machines) voice/telegraph system and the Type 1 ku Model 3 Radio Compass or Radio Direction Finder. The Type 1-3 was the standard RDF unit for most carrier-borne IJN aircraft. The Type 96-1 system was previously used in the A5M4 fighters. The Type 96-1 system consisted of three components, all of which were installed in the cockpit. The transmitter and receiver were separate units that were placed low on the right side of the cockpit. They were hung in the standard shock mount that consisted of frames above and below the radio which had bungee cords secured to them. The bungees were looped around spools mounted on the radio casing. The suspended radio was protected from shocks by the flexibility of the cords. The control box for the Type 1-3 RDF was mounted above and between the two Type 96 sets. The control for rotating the RDF antenna was directly to the rear of the control box. The directional loop antenna was mounted in the fuselage deck beneath the canopy behind the rollover pylon.  It consisted of two round stamped-metal frames with a center post. The actual antenna was made of insulated wire wrapped around and between the frames. Cloth was then applied over the wire and doped. This gave the assembly the appearance of a thick loop with a center post. A visual indicator for flying along a directional radio range signal was mounted in the lower left corner of the instrument panel. The face of this instrument has an arc painted on it with characters for ‘right’ and ‘left’. A needle indicated the relative position of the aircraft to the signal. One further control was a round switch box mounted next to the pilot’s right shoulder. This was for switching the antenna’s reception function between the communication radio and the RDF system. This was to allow the RDF operator to use the antenna to monitor AM radio broadcasts. Commander Mitsuo Fuchida used this feature on December 7, 1941 as he approached Oahu. The regular music broadcast from Honolulu assured him that the American forces were unaware of his impending attack. 

 

The direction finding function worked as follows. When the axis of the loop antenna is pointed at the transmission source it will receive no signal. When the plane of the loop is pointed at the source it will receive the strongest signal. The pilot finds the angle at which he can hear no signal and sees that course on his ‘route meter’ on the face of the control box. He uses his compass to bring his aircraft to that heading. However there is a drawback to the system. When the area of no signal is found, it is on a bearing both towards and away from the source. If the pilot has good weather conditions he may be able to tell from the position of the sun the general direction in which he needs to fly. If overcast or darkness is prevailing he may inadvertently fly a reciprocal course away from the source. 

 

Similar equipment would be found on both B5N and D3A. Of U.S. equipment I know very little, but there were good videos on that topic posted on youtube. PF had mods to give proper functioning to those systems.

 

 

 

From my understanding, the Wildcats started to do better when they stopped trying to dogfight the Zeros. They either engaged when they had superiority (high alt, and so on), refused engagement when they did not have the advantage (which, quite frankly, is generally the wise thing to do in general regardless of your airframe), or when they did fight they refused to dogfight them in the traditional way... and this is where things like the Thach Weave came in: instead of trying to outmaneuver the Zero going after them, they went after the Zero attacking their wingmen.

Wildcats did better than any other U.S. fighter in 1942. And they did better consistently from the beginning, whether that would be Coral Sea, Midway or Guadalcanal they came out of 1942 as the only U.S. fighter close to 1:1 K/D ratio or really breaking even. Neither superior on paper P-39, P-40, Hurricane or few other types achieved such record. They did that also by dog fighting. And later in the Guadacanal campaign (still during 1942) Marine units in some cases specifically sought to "dog fight" Zeroes whose quality of pilots they perceived as having declined. Also, the engagements between carrier based F4F's and carrier based Zeroes in the 4 carrier battles of 1942 gave no particular advantage to the F4F's in establishing superior initial altitude, as some of the Guadalcanal combats did, but the F4F's did about as well in those combats as at Guadalcanal.

I think people will loose a lot of fun if they will only stick to hit and run tactics with Wildcat. That thing can do more than that and it did. 

[HagarTheHorrible]

Multiplayer might be a bit lop sided, multiplayer fits much more closely to the IJN philosophy of performance over durability.  When you don't have to worry about going home, swimming with the sharks or even dying a thousand deaths, brick sh*thouses don't count for very much.  The only way I can think to even up the scorecard is to have the Zero's run out of petrol real quick if they get hit and holed in their fuel tanks, obviously if they don't do a flamer first, or failing that they lose fuel at a much faster rate if they continue to maneuver in a dogfight rather than try to leg it home, with home being the goal  That way they have to be real careful about taking any damage whatsoever.  The A.I are also particularly bad, at the moment, of fighting to the death, spewing all sorts of gunk without a care in the world.  Very much the Monty Python and the Holy grail, Knights of Nee, approach (Tiz but a scratch).

I wonder if it would be possible to calculate distance to friendly airfield (or carrier) x fuel left x fuel consumption x fuel loss so that if someone disconnects after a fight but before reaching a friendly nesting spot they still die, or their chances of dying goes up considerably and thus don't bank any points or record of achieving a kill.  The virtual Zero pilots don't HAVE to get home but it must still be possible when they disconnect, for dogfights to have any meaning.