Found Historical Innaucuracy

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i was looking thru the battle of midway campaign file using sh4 mission editior, AND i found out that ON January 1942 Nagumos fleets move towards midway, zigzag a few times here and there, then they travel back to japan and the fleets dissapear!!! , THEN beg of June 1942 the other support fleets and invasion fleets make their move towards Midway island.

heres a pic i made, PLEASE FIX THIS BUG!!! no wonder i wasnt able to find em in june 1942 theyw ere already dead:doh::doh::damn:

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/2337/hisannacuracyaq1.jpg

[elite_hunter_sh3]

bump cuz theres no midway battle during dynamic campagin!!!:huh::damn::damn::damn::damn:

[GakunGak]

bump cuz theres no midway battle during dynamic campagin!!!:huh::damn::damn::damn::damn:
I guess the DEV's were more focused at graphics than missions, and one of them said that they just position the ships and then they are on their own acting the way they want... I guess it was the romanian dev video...:88)

[elite_hunter_sh3]

gakun when did u get the game/?????:up:

[GakunGak]

I didn't [yet] because I'm on the waiting list from Romania as the (http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5894/crossed20clubs20thank20lz0.jpg) guy from my sig will send it to me...
I can't tell you man how many good people are here...:rock:
I also appreciate your offer, but this way would be faster and easier.... Once I find a way to repay him, I'd do it asap...:yep:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

well i you want to see for yourselfs the bug, then open sh4 mission editor , THEN, load up battleofMidway file in the campaign folder in main data folder for sh4, then fast forward to january 1941 and watch them.

[GakunGak]

well i you want to see for yourselfs the bug, then open sh4 mission editor , THEN, load up battleofMidway file in the campaign folder in main data folder for sh4, then fast forward to january 1941 and watch them.
I did and well, I have no historical knowledge to Midway, but this was a good explanation for further patches....
Good job!:up:

[JetSnake]

Ghost fleet!:arrgh!:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i was really and mean REALLY angry when i found this out because i spent 4.5hrs today reloading a save game point a few days before battle of midway after i refueld and refitted at midway, patrolling up and down and around midway looking for japanese fleet, and never found em only the us fleets..:shifty::shifty::shifty::shifty::damn::dam n::damn:

[GakunGak]

Man, with that kind of frustration, I'd fire one of my own...
And the USN would lose the confident in my ability to command and then....:arrgh!:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Speaking Midway, someone took a look at the code as theres a bug in there. Apparently a lot of the Japanese taskforces sail for Midway in January and not June, get near and then sail back to Japan and disappear.

yep heres the thread, EVERYONE CHECK UR battleofmidway MISSION file in ur campaign folder, u will see that when u press play in mission editior that the fleet sails for midway in JANUARY 1942 and not june 1942 like its supposed to

[sea enemy]

One of the biggest/most common innacuracies I've seen is the complete overuse of the IJN DD Akizuki class...I've found a troop convoy in 12/41 that had eight of them...And the wierd thing is, that seems to contradict the roster .mis file for a '41 troop convoy...odd..
But, not to mention that there shouldn't be any Akizuki class at all in '41...
It seems to have been made (accidently, I hope) the 'default' IJN DD...In my experience. Too bad..It should be the Fubuki.

[tater]

I looked at the Midway single mission, and it was pretty pathetic. They could at least have used the CVs they actually have that were there. Also, the ships are all on top of each other instead of the 7 KILOMETERS apart the IJN maintained as a standard.

Yeesh.

[Dreamer]

Ugh. I suppose my latest patrol (started mid-May, 1942) can continue and I can cease waiting for the IJN to show up. Thanks for the heads up.

Martin

[LukeFF]

Also, the ships are all on top of each other instead of the 7 KILOMETERS apart the IJN maintained as a standard.

Yeesh.

Add another thing to the to-be-modded list. :D

[sandbag69]

I looked at the Midway single mission, and it was pretty pathetic. They could at least have used the CVs they actually have that were there. Also, the ships are all on top of each other instead of the 7 KILOMETERS apart the IJN maintained as a standard.

Yeesh.

7KM apart...u mean 700metres apart. :ping:

I have been creating my own Midway Mission based on a book I ma reading titled MIDWAY (Hugh Bicheno).
It shows the Cruising formation of the Jap Carrier task force and actual paths.

Jap fleet headed towards Midway , until it was first attacked by Aircraft. It the did a kinda of large figure of 8 then resumed course until US Carrier were spotted. Then it headed NE to intercept them. About an hour later 3 of the 4 Carriers were sunk. 4th carrier continued on diverging course with US Fleet until it to was sunk.

Wil try and scan images and post them soon. Cruising order is really interesting.
4 carriers in box formation with destroyer in beween each carrier.

I played the mission with the actual Cruising formation and found i couldn't sink a carrier. I did install harder escorts Mod though but even then i couldn't get a clear shot at target.:damn:

[Linavitch]

Doesn't this make the campaign 'more dynamic'?

Seems a bit odd to play 100% realism but then wait, forewarned, for a task force.


Shame you can't start 1st dec '41 and sink the carriers before Pearl Harbour. Might get a nobel peace prize for averting a war!

[sandbag69]

Doesn't this make the campaign 'more dynamic'?

Seems a bit odd to play 100% realism but then wait, forewarned, for a task force.


Shame you can't start 1st dec '41 and sink the carriers before Pearl Harbour. Might get a nobel peace prize for averting a war!

Doesn't make it odd. in fact it makes it more realistic. US Subs were aware taht Jap Task forces were on way to Midway. US broke Purple codes before the war even began. U Subs were picketed in an arc at Midway across the likely approach route of Jap Task force.
Singlemission would just mimic the initial dispositions of combat units. Then its up to you to see how you perform in heat of battle.
Remember you should not expect to fight battles exactly as they were fought in WW2. Rather you are placing yourself in command of US Sub and seeing if you damage enemy etc.

[tater]

I looked at the Midway single mission, and it was pretty pathetic. They could at least have used the CVs they actually have that were there. Also, the ships are all on top of each other instead of the 7 KILOMETERS apart the IJN maintained as a standard.

Yeesh.
7KM apart...u mean 700metres apart. :ping:
NO. IJN doctrine had the CVs 7000m apart. There was a "plane guard" DD behind a few hundred meters to pick up downed pilots. So you had a 7000 box of 4 CVs, each with a DD behind. Off to either side of the lead CVs another 15,000m was a CA on each side. Leading the center of the box by 7000m was another 2 CAs, each was 15,000m off the center of the CV box. Leading that in the center a couple thousand meters was a CA with a DD close behind. This changed for different battles, but the basics were the same in terms of spacing, even if for a given engagement they were 5000m instead of 7000m, or in line instead of a box.

A quick and dirty diagram of the standard box formation circa late 1941:
http://members.spinn.net/%7Emerrick/Stuff/ijncvbg1941.JPG
The spacign between the CVs (squares) is 7000m. The rest is to scale except for the plane guard DDs behind the CVs which are too far astern.


Think about it this way. The ships, operating at flank speed for a CV, needed to be able to turn independantly of each other during air attack to avoid bombs without even having to think about collision. So look at a formation. If any major combatant made a radical turn, is a collision possible within a short time period? If the answer is "yes" they are too close together.

[tater]

Note that additional DD units if present would likely be all along the far outside as pickets/ASW. IJN doctrine for CAP over the fleet had the zero pilots looking for AAA at the fringes, and then heading for the activity since they lacked radar guidance (or radios, most times).

tater

[sandbag69]

I looked at the Midway single mission, and it was pretty pathetic. They could at least have used the CVs they actually have that were there. Also, the ships are all on top of each other instead of the 7 KILOMETERS apart the IJN maintained as a standard.

Yeesh.
7KM apart...u mean 700metres apart. :ping:
NO. IJN doctrine had the CVs 7000m apart. There was a "plane guard" DD behind a few hundred meters to pick up downed pilots. So you had a 7000 box of 4 CVs, each with a DD behind. Off to either side of the lead CVs another 15,000m was a CA on each side. Leading the center of the box by 7000m was another 2 CAs, each was 15,000m off the center of the CV box. Leading that in the center a couple thousand meters was a CA with a DD close behind. This changed for different battles, but the basics were the same in terms of spacing, even if for a given engagement they were 5000m instead of 7000m, or in line instead of a box.

A quick and dirty diagram of the standard box formation circa late 1941:
http://members.spinn.net/%7Emerrick/Stuff/ijncvbg1941.JPG
The spacign between the CVs (squares) is 7000m. The rest is to scale except for the plane guard DDs behind the CVs which are too far astern.


Think about it this way. The ships, operating at flank speed for a CV, needed to be able to turn independantly of each other during air attack to avoid bombs without even having to think about collision. So look at a formation. If any major combatant made a radical turn, is a collision possible within a short time period? If the answer is "yes" they are too close together.

Where did u get ur info for 7Km apart?

Seems crazy to me. No destroyers could screen a task force if each Carrier was 7KM apart.

[tater]

SUNBURST: The Rise of Japanese Naval Airpower, 1909 - 1941

It was IJN doctrine for the Kido Butai. They were more concerned about air attack than subs I think. Regardless, if attacked by a sub, they'd want to be able to maneuver. Imagine the total chaos at night if ships had to avoid a torpedo attack witha 700m spacing. They'd lose half the fleet from collsions.


The USN had similar issues with CV task forces early in the war. One faction wanted each CV to operate independantly over the horizon from the next. The idea was to make it so a single snooper or strike force would only see ONE CV at a time. the trade off was difficulty screening and maintaining CAP in addition to increased chances that one group might be detected. It was done in a mixed way at Midway with Enterprise and Hornet over the horizon from poor Yorktown

[tater]

OK, I just checked Shattered Sword (which if you were to have just one book about Midway, this would be it, the rest are totally inaccurate regarding the japanese forces and motivations for their decisions). The Kido Butai at Midway was unsurprisingly*** in standard 7km box. There were more escorts hovering around the fringes.

Moments before the fatal air attacks hit, they had maneuvered from previous attack into a loose line abreast about 7km apart.

If yuo see a CV group in a game with ships close by, and they are not refueling the CV, they are too close, lol. Most games should add a zero tot he spacing between ships (in meters).

tater

***EDIT: unsurprisingly since it was their doctrine to operate that way. Edited to make it clear I'm not being snippy. BTW, if you get a midway mission dialed in with the right spacings, I'd love to have a crack at it!

[XanderF]

Speaking of 'historical inaccuracy', the US flag you see every time you run the game on the loading screen is driving me nuts! I mean, seriously, did they not even bother to CHECK?

[tater]

LOL, Il-2 had 50 star flags sometimes. Drove me nuts. Still does.

[tater]

I made a Q&D mission of the IJN midway forces in a box. Was gettig tired so I forgot to add a few DDs that were also with them. About 6, actually that were a screening force. Tonight I'll throw 6 around the fringes.. Interestingly the CV's train of oilers had a single DD as escort.

Anyway, I approached the formation on the surface, then dived as soon as I had a radar contact. I was harried by planes of all 3 CV types. That's really goofy (though on my game right now zeros have no bombs since they shouldn't, so they mostly just fly around). Was an interesting sight through the periscope. I set the mission so I'd find them easily---I was due south of the center of the formation. I first saw the CL and it's consort, a DD. Put a fish in the CL and it went down by the bow but didn't sink. The sea was a little rough which possibly helped me avoid the DD which didn't try very hard to find me. KNowing the formation I put the rudder over and angled a little to one side since the CL was roughly 3500 yards from each line of CVs. Got a quartering bow shot on a Hiryu. 2 fish and she rolled over and sank (I have the "realistic sinking" on, too. I swear the CVs need serious work, they are a joke to sink, at least Hiryu). Her plane guard DD drove around pinging. I styed on that side and let Shokaku (stand in for Akagi and Kaga) have it with 2 fish. First was a head shot which damaged the bow. Second was an aft tube shot from the port side and she listed a little. Took 2 more to sink her, one might have detonated prematurely. Felt better than the Hiryu though. Tried to make it to the other column, but there was no way that was gonna happen submerged.

I think with 6 DDs screening ahead, assuming they were reasonably aggressive, getting in to the formation would be tricky. OTOH, Nautilus did it in RL.

tater

[TheSatyr]

Biggest misconception I see on the forums about the battle of Midway was the Nautilus' role in the battle. By the time she got into position to do anything, the carrier fleet had already been hit hard and most of the surviving ships had already withdrawn.

Since she was just up against 3 burning carriers and a few ships that were there to stand by the stricken carriers it was easy for her to get a firing position on the Kaga. She got 3 hits on the Kaga,all were duds and as a matter of fact one of the torps actually broke in two after striking the Kaga. The rear portion of the torp actually floated and a few japanese sailors used it as a liferaft till they were picked up.

The Nautilus did try to get into position to attack one of Nagumo's 2 BB escorts earlier in the day,but was forced to go deep by aircraft and DDs.

The Cpt of the Nautilus not only mis-identified the carrier he was shooting at,he also thought the DDs were CLs. From what I understand,they were still using the pre-refit versions of the Akagi and Kaga in the US Navy recognition manual...which is why he thought the Kaga was the Soryu.

[sandbag69]

7Km Apart?

http://www.todaysseniorsnetwork.com/battle%20of%20midway.jpg

[TheSatyr]

7KM apart would mean that the ships would be too far apart to support each other. 2000yds maybe,but I don't buy the 7KM thing at all.

I'll have to read "Midway:The Battle that Doomed Japan" By Fuchida and Okumiya again and see if they give the ranges. What they did say was that the carriers were in a tight box formation up until the time the attacks by a/c from Midway started...then the Hiryu and Soryu got a little seperated from the Akagi and Kaga.

And if you've seen the Japanese footage of the attack on Pearl Harbor you'd see that the carriers were rather close to each other.

[sandbag69]

7KM apart would mean that the ships would be too far apart to support each other. 2000yds maybe,but I don't buy the 7KM thing at all.

I'll have to read "Midway:The Battle that Doomed Japan" By Fuchida and Okumiya again and see if they give the ranges. What they did say was that the carriers were in a tight box formation up until the time the attacks by a/c from Midway started...then the Hiryu and Soryu got a little seperated from the Akagi and Kaga.

And if you've seen the Japanese footage of the attack on Pearl Harbor you'd see that the carriers were rather close to each other.

I agree totally. Midway by Hugh Bichero displays a diagram of actual Jap Cruising formation at 0700 on 4th June 1942. Shows Tight box of Carriers with probably no more than 700m to 1.2Km spacing. I will try and scan it when next at home and post it.

[tater]

7000m.

Try Kaigun, Sunburst, or Shattered Sword.

7000m

Not 700m, 7000m. That painting is art, not history.

Fuchida's book is loaded with errors. Heck, Fuchida has the flight decks crowded with aircraft. Odd, since they were conducting CAP TO and landing within minutes of the strikes, and it took a long time to get a strike from the hangers (where all IJN planes were gassed up, bombed up, and warmed up) to the rear of the flight deck to launch. Fuchida's book was discredited in Japan in the 50s, but since it was the only japanese account in english, it has been repeated. So for some stuff, take it with a grain of salt.

The IJN CVs were in a turn in loose line abreast when the SDBs showed up. They were roughtly 7km apart at that point (some more, some less).

Sorry, it's just true. the packed together ships nonsense is great for movies where you want everything in one shot, but it isn;t real.

tater

[Sailor Steve]

7000 meters...7 kilometers...

Are you saying that they were all 4 and a half MILES apart? Standard for most navies was either 500 or 1000 yards. I think you need to not make categorical statements like "Sorry, it's just true."

You belittle Fuchida, which I don't know about, but you don't give any source - let alone a credible one - for your "facts".

[tater]

Note that even the famous Geddes dioramas have the CVs at least 3km apart (a CV is ~300m long for scale if you see a pic).

[tater]

Um, 3 sources were given. Sunburst (Naval Institute Press), a history of japanese naval aviation from its inception to the start of the war, Kaigun (also NIP), a history of the IJN from its inception to the start of the war, and Shattered Sword, the best book on Midway for anything related to the japanese side of the battle. The diagram of the standard "tight box" formation used by IJN CVs in 1941 is from an original japanese source, I'd have to dig through the footnotes.

<EDIT> the source for the diagram Peatie used in Sunburst? Genda Minoru (yes, THAT Genda, he was there), Shinjuwan sakusen, pg63

<EDIT 2> (trying to keep the seperate posts down, lol) I just looked at a PH take off video (japanese): http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/himpearlharbor1.htm not a ship to be seen.

tater

[tater]

Barrett Tillman's TBD Devastator Units of the US Navy ( http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN1841760250&id=S8qwYCcT_soC&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&ots=Uq6F4ND6FV&dq=kido+butai+box&sig=rQznpDonOE6CtSL8d1v5eucdnGo )

"He listed AA last, because although Kido Butai had 17 escorts, they were spread across a 20 nautical mile box to permit the four carriers individual maneuvering room, contrary to US practise which emphasized mutual support."

BTW, we are talking about a battle formation. This is how they arrayed when near an objective, or conducting flight ops, etc. If they were in bad weather, etc, they'd have to tighten up to be able to signal visually (if keeping radio silence). So if they were in fog, or squalls, etc, this distance might shorten hugely.

[Sailor Steve]

Um, 3 sources were given. Sunburst (Naval Institute Press), a history of japanese naval aviation from its inception to the start of the war, Kaigun (also NIP), a history of the IJN from its inception to the start of the war, and Shattered Sword, the best book on Midway for anything related to the japanese side of the battle. The diagram of the standard "tight box" formation used by IJN CVs in 1941 is from an original japanese source, I'd have to dig through the footnotes.

<EDIT> the source for the diagram Peatie used in Sunburst? Genda Minoru (yes, THAT Genda, he was there), Shinjuwan sakusen, pg63

<EDIT 2> (trying to keep the seperate posts down, lol) I just looked at a PH take off video (japanese): http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/himpearlharbor1.htm not a ship to be seen.

tater
You're right, you did give those before. I stand corrected (hey, it happens). On the other hand, that could be part of why they lost at Midway.

I came on strong without reading enough. Apologies.

[tater]

Sorry if I did as well. <S>

BTW, shattered sword is an awesome book to read. The authors (combinedfleet.com is their website, BTW) emailed a japanese guy with questions about Fuchida's book. They knew about politeness and japanese, etc, and they asked in a VERY roundabout way if Fuchida might possibly, maybe be a little tiny bit in error regarding X, Y, and Z. The reply they got was like (paraphrase here) "that hack? his book is self serving crap! No one here (in the history community) has taken him seriously for decades! This is what happened: blah blah blah"

Really the definitive book now, I have Fuchida's book, and used to think it was the definitive book, myself.

[tater]

BTW, look at that painting again. How would those CVs "comb" a torpedo attack?

How would they conduct landing ops? Planes fly over, peel off to space planes, do thier downwind, then turn to trap on the CV. Is there room for a downwind then turn there? No.

Also, the SBDs are coming out of dives crossing the target. They bombed along the length of a target, not across which would make a hit FAR more difficult.

tater

[tater]

I agree totally. Midway by Hugh Bichero displays a diagram of actual Jap Cruising formation at 0700 on 4th June 1942. Shows Tight box of Carriers with probably no more than 700m to 1.2Km spacing. I will try and scan it when next at home and post it.

Jonathan Parshall's comment in a review of Midway (he's the coauthor of Shattered Sword and runs combinedfleet.com):

Some of the Illustrations are misleading. For instance, the map on page 128, showing various attacks on the Japanese carrier formation between 0700-0820 goes into great detail regarding the individual placement of Japanese vessels, the *entirety* of which is completely wrong. The four carriers are misplaced relative to their known divisional alignments. Furthermore, the outlying escort vessels are badly represented as well, with those few destroyers that we can be reasonably sure were close to the carriers (since they were plane-guard escorts) shown out on the perimeter. In other words, for this map at least Bicheno simply took a wild guess and drew some pretty pictures. But the picture is utterly wrong.
He says that other than some errors like that the book is quite good and gives it 4 stars.

[sandbag69]

If its defo true that the japs CV's were 7KM apart then no wonder they lost the battle.
The AA fire to defend the carriers would have been ineffective. No AA Box would have been created to defend the carriers. Basically the Cv's would have been sitting ducks to any Dive bomber getting through the CAP.

Maybe this Thread has stumbled on the real reason for the Japs to loose Midway and not just the fact that the Zero's had gone low level to defend against the TBD attacks thus allowing the Dive Bombers to annihilate the carriers.

[tater]

Actually, Shattered Sword goes to great lengths to explain that IJN doctrine had everything to do with their losses on many levels.

AAA was poor just 6 months into the war anyway, with IJN ships far less capable than USN ships of the same period. To be fair, USN CV doctrine was similarly in flux. There was a raging battle in the USN regarding how to deploy CVs in TFs, closer together for mutual support, or scattered. Regardless, putting them close together is not much of an option. At the short distances you suggest (remember 700m is just over 2 ship lengths), they would be totally incapable of individual maneuver. None whatsoever would be possible at thgeir 30+ knot flank speed. Spreading out made sense for the IJN. the screen can prosecute subs too far to hit the CVs, and they can fire AAA at incoming planes---warning the CAP, remember the zeros usually had no working radios.

AAA fire was meant to discourage pressing home an attack. Until the USN started using VT fuses (radar fused) AA, it was pretty hit or miss. If VBs get through the cap, it's down to pilot skill and nerve to see who gets hits. Same is true for the USN as the target. The USN also had far far far better DC than the IJN. Most of the CVs the IJN lost probably would have been saved by US crews/doctrine.

This IS the way the IJN fought CV groups. It is also not that far off the way the USN did as well. we had tighter groups, but ships could still turn if they needed to. We're only talking about 4.3 statute miles here. That really is not that far, even if a game like SH only has an 8km view range, it's much farther in RL.

[tater]

OK, I altered my little mission again. I added the remaing DDs in 2 desdivs steaming as groups zig-zagging (2-3000m spacing between DDs). Made getting into the CV group slightly trickier. I noticed that if my scope was up, the planes would circle, then the DDs turned into me. I dropped the scope, and they kept coming, but stopped short to mill around (presumably looking for me).

The first time I ran it I forgot to reset the waypoint speed, so they were going 5 knots. This time I had them cruise at 19 knots. It was far harder. Surfacing was no option, and underwater I'd have a shot at a given ship, but no way to catch up. Fired a spread at Kongo, and she turned away.

tater

[minsc_tdp]

Bug #82 added (http://sh4bugs.com/show_bug.cgi?id=82)

Since this looks like there are, or will be, mods to fix this, please post to the bug to help share the work

[LargeSlowTarget]

Other historical inaccuracies I found:

Started campaign commanding an old pigboat in the PI in Dec 41. Sighted a large group of enemy warships, approached submerged and found three Mogami-type cruisers, the version with the flight deck aft. WTF? There was only one ship of this class which got converted to a cruiser/carrier hybrid, and only after Midway (Mogami herself, after the heavy damage she had received) - why are three of them in front of me in Dec 41?!?
Later I found a different convoy (btw, it just sat fat, happy and stopped in the China Sea :confused:), managed to miss a transport (darn TDC) but the fish did hit a ship which overlapped behind. Turned out to be an Agano class CL - but all ships of that class were still under construction at that time historically...

The Dev Team has done good work in the graphics department, but the history buff inside me is driven crazy by 'OOB errors' like that...


EDIT: Sorry, maybe I should have openend a seperate thread - moderator?

[tater]

Nah, I was largely responsible for a long OT, yer right on the money.