Author Topic: Japanese Carrier Production in WWII  (Read 238 times)

bayonetbrant

  • Arrogance Mitigator
  • Administrator
  • Jr Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 902
  • Onward and upward
on: September 01, 2018, 01:03:50 PM
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-japan-didnt-go-aircraft-carrier-crazy-beat-america-during-world-war-ii-30292

Does a better production plan really matter in the long run, or was the outcome inevitable?

Random acts of genius and other inspirations of applied violence.


mirth

  • Cardboard Harlot
  • Administrator
  • Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 1874
    • Armchair Dragoons
Reply #1 on: September 04, 2018, 03:40:09 PM
cool read

Being able to Google shit better than your clients is a legit career skill.


BanzaiCat

  • Trooper
  • **
  • Posts: 402
  • Faith an' Boardgameah

besilarius

  • Fresh Recruit
  • Posts: 9
Reply #3 on: December 07, 2018, 07:28:41 AM
Good article.
Here is another appreciation from the folks who gave you Shattered Sword.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm



mirth

  • Cardboard Harlot
  • Administrator
  • Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 1874
    • Armchair Dragoons
Reply #4 on: December 07, 2018, 08:10:05 AM
Combined Fleet is a great site. Lots of good info there.

Being able to Google shit better than your clients is a legit career skill.


chemkid

  • Fresh Recruit
  • Posts: 8
  • Do Not Try This At Home
Reply #5 on: December 07, 2018, 08:19:05 AM
shattered sword was kinda an eye-opener, at least for me - i had a plan to enjoy a great solo game of the flat top board-game... and then, after reading the book, all imaginary plans evaporated because American vs Japanese carrier handling was so damn different! does anyone know a game analog or digital that takes these differences to heart and makes playing the Japanese part of carrier operations different from their American counterparts? so, off to reading this article - oh, and i did a whole card-box full of plane and carrier data just to prepare for my flat top endeavor...  anyone likes some of these?! ;)

cheers!
chem!



bayonetbrant

  • Arrogance Mitigator
  • Administrator
  • Jr Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 902
  • Onward and upward
Reply #6 on: December 07, 2018, 08:19:25 AM
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-japan-didnt-go-aircraft-carrier-crazy-beat-america-during-world-war-ii-30292

Does a better production plan really matter in the long run, or was the outcome inevitable?


re-reading this one


here's your craziest quote in here


Quote
During the entire war, Japan commissioned 31 destroyers, while the United States commissioned 365. The Japanese commissioned five light cruisers and no heavy cruisers, while the United States commissioned 46 large, heavy, and light cruisers.

Random acts of genius and other inspirations of applied violence.


bayonetbrant

  • Arrogance Mitigator
  • Administrator
  • Jr Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 902
  • Onward and upward
Reply #7 on: December 07, 2018, 08:23:02 AM
question for some of y'all -

is there a good reference on the differences between

fleet carriers vs escort carriers vs light carriers

heavy cruisers vs light cruisers vs large cruisers

Random acts of genius and other inspirations of applied violence.


mirth

  • Cardboard Harlot
  • Administrator
  • Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 1874
    • Armchair Dragoons
Reply #8 on: December 07, 2018, 08:26:37 AM
shattered sword was kinda an eye-opener, at least for me - i had a plan to enjoy a great solo game of the flat top board-game... and then, after reading the book, all imaginary plans evaporated because American vs Japanese carrier handling was so damn different! does anyone know a game analog or digital that takes these differences to heart and makes playing the Japanese part of carrier operations different from their American counterparts? so, off to reading this article - oh, and i did a whole card-box full of plane and carrier data just to prepare for my flat top endeavor...  anyone likes some of these?! ;)

Shattered Sword was an eye-opener for a lot of people. It really went in-depth into IJN doctrine for carrier ops.


We did a big double-blind game for Coral Sea last year. We used the Flat Top map for plotting searches and moves. Then we used General Quarters III for resolving battles. GQIII doean't really account for doctrinal differences for air ops, but it was still a great game. Doing it double-blind was the key.

Being able to Google shit better than your clients is a legit career skill.


bbmike

  • Jr Lancer
  • ***
  • Posts: 787
Reply #9 on: December 07, 2018, 09:06:41 AM
...
We did a big double-blind game for Coral Sea last year. We used the Flat Top map for plotting searches and moves. Then we used General Quarters III for resolving battles. GQIII doean't really account for doctrinal differences for air ops, but it was still a great game. Doing it double-blind was the key.

That sounds like something that would be fun at Origins.

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplace of existence."
-Sherlock Holmes


mirth

  • Cardboard Harlot
  • Administrator
  • Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 1874
    • Armchair Dragoons
Reply #10 on: December 07, 2018, 09:28:58 AM
...
We did a big double-blind game for Coral Sea last year. We used the Flat Top map for plotting searches and moves. Then we used General Quarters III for resolving battles. GQIII doean't really account for doctrinal differences for air ops, but it was still a great game. Doing it double-blind was the key.

That sounds like something that would be fun at Origins.

Yes. I can send you the info so you can run it :P

Being able to Google shit better than your clients is a legit career skill.


bbmike

  • Jr Lancer
  • ***
  • Posts: 787
Reply #11 on: December 07, 2018, 09:50:02 AM
I suspect if I tried the Kriegspiel guys would probably run a calvary charge at me.

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplace of existence."
-Sherlock Holmes


bayonetbrant

  • Arrogance Mitigator
  • Administrator
  • Jr Lancer
  • *
  • Posts: 902
  • Onward and upward
Reply #12 on: December 07, 2018, 10:44:10 AM
I suspect if I tried the Kriegspiel guys would probably run a calvary charge at me.


hey, a cavalry charge has, in fact, captured a fleet before


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_of_the_Dutch_fleet_at_Den_Helder

Random acts of genius and other inspirations of applied violence.


bbmike

  • Jr Lancer
  • ***
  • Posts: 787
Reply #13 on: December 07, 2018, 05:38:46 PM
Hey, don't encourage them!

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplace of existence."
-Sherlock Holmes


besilarius

  • Fresh Recruit
  • Posts: 9
Reply #14 on: December 08, 2018, 09:23:15 AM
Chemkid, if you really want a nuts and bolts view of the differences between the IJN and USN, one thing that is only lightly covered is fleet Anti-Aircraft doctrine.
Shattered Sword touches on the Japanese.  Which was extremely rudimentary.  They relied on the individual ship's firepower and maneuverability.
Considering how weak their AA guns were, this made a certain amount of sense.  In order to enhance their maneuverability, they often moved the escorting ships away from the carriers to give the carrier captain as much freedom to maneuver as possible.
The american approach was the total opposite.
The USN from the start put in a lot of effort into developing AA weapons, and the suites of weaponry on their carriers.  Even before the proximity fuse was developed, Japanese aviators were shocked at the volume and density of fire that they had to fly through in their attacks.
A US task force sailed with the carrier in the center (designated ZuluZulu), a ring of cruisers at around1,000 yards or more, and an outer ring of destroyers.
Under aerial attack, they pulled in closer to the carrier.  The concept was to have the attackers go through successive rings of defensive fire, which were close enough to combine the totality of their firepower.
This tactical difference is never recognised in game designs.
https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/a/antiaircraft-action-summary.html