Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Well, Japan is already ready to use R-47 gas and probably would throw in the new experimental GX3 gas as well just to see what it does.Quoted
And who knows, what decisions the Chinese military made if it stands with his back against the wall.
I don't think that the Prince of Wales and Repulse had 885 carrier fighters (+ whatever fighters from land bases) available to them when they were attacked by the Japanese...Quoted
I doubt that Japan will bring it's big ships an area of chinese air superiority. We have seen in OTL what happened to Battleships in an air attack. I only say two words .... Prince of Wales and Repulse.
These submarines are great targets for Japan's +300 ASW ships.Quoted
These carriers are a great target for chinese submarines
Doing that decreases the chances of the Chinese taking Jeju-Do even more. I don't think an attempt of capturing Jeju-Do will be a very bloody success. It will end up being a very bloody failure (and casualties may include those who came up with the plan to capture it).Quoted
Above all, it would be much easier and of course safer for Japan to deploy all these fighters directly on Jeju-Do and not on the carriers.
The few Japanese radar systems that China has, have their limits as well and a lot of Chinese targets are along the coastline so by the time the Chinese pick up the bombers on Radar and move fighters to intercept, the bombers will already be dropping their bombs. Because a lot of targets are along the coast, it means that when a Japanese crew needs to bail out, it is more likely that they will bail out over water which would increase their chances of getting rescued by sub.Quoted
Even if the Chinese fighters / interceptors are not the most modern, so they are very numerous. And the other problem for the japanese air force will be not only the lost of the aircrafts, much more important is the lost of the crews. Chinese airmen bail out over friendly territory but the japanese not.
It was just an example to indicate what the G10N could do during that time period of the war and to indicate how few operational G10N bombers are needed to achieve that (though as mentioned below I should have used 'per mission' instead of 'per day'). I'm not saying that there are 27 G10N bombers. There will be a lot more than that around.Quoted
Weight-wise you may be right, what about shootings ..... mechanical malfunctions ..... and and and .... with 27 bombers / day i would give you only some sorties before you will stop it or better say you must stop it because all your aircrafts are gone.
While that is true, I think looking at the quarterly reports might give some indication as well. While we do not look at Air Force and Army construction with the Wesworld reports, I would think that they could sort of indicate as to the capabilities of building AF and Army stuff...Quoted
I'm basing that opinion on the Chinese and Japanese encyclopedias and your various news posts
Yes, I realize should have said 'per attack' (so the 27 bombers of the 2nd attack don't have to be the same ones as those of the 1st attack). But it was more an example than what could be done. Remember that it assumese that the bombing starts the moment that the Sino-Chosen war starts (which in 'reality' is not the case).Quoted
I don't agree that 27 bombers a day (highly unlikely to have all of them making two sorties a day given the ranges flown, maintenance required, crew availability etc.) can drop the same amount or more as mass RAF raids or have as much impact.
From what I can remember of the news, the survivors are still waiting for the Canadian ships to arrive to pick them up...Quoted
speaking of, there is that Canadian freighter that exploded a while back, if anyone ever wants to deal with that...
Yeah, looking back at that post, that did end up way longer than I initially wanted. Sorry about that. And to think that I even deleted a few paragraphs before posting it...Quoted
bla bla bla
Surprises me that you did not say that if each letter I typed was a 10 meter section of bridge, you'd have enough to make a bridge to get your troops to Japan.I think it would be interesting to see all the japanese navy stuff sailing around the small island .... you can walk from China directly to Japan without getting wet foots ... thanks for building a bridge for chinese soldiers
While that is true, I think looking at the quarterly reports might give some indication as well. While we do not look at Air Force and Army construction with the Wesworld reports, I would think that they could sort of indicate as to the capabilities of building AF and Army stuff...Quoted
I'm basing that opinion on the Chinese and Japanese encyclopedias and your various news posts
China vs Japan: 11,000 tons vs 27,000 tons
I assume the survivors were picked up promptly, I've just been very busy with MAGFest and having H1N1. I'm more interested if there's going to be any reaction from the combatants and other regional powers.From what I can remember of the news, the survivors are still waiting for the Canadian ships to arrive to pick them up...Quoted
speaking of, there is that Canadian freighter that exploded a while back, if anyone ever wants to deal with that...
... or did those ships end up as submarine dinner?
I'd suggest focusing on the period up to December 1944 first, to catch up with the sim - then work on 1945 onward as we all move forward.
The rest of us don't require a full history, we just need you caught up to the rest of us. So long you can keep up with us moving forward, there is no need for a set script or timeline moving forward, and I'd actually encourage you to let the war develop organically based on interaction with the rest of the playerbase.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH