4 replies to this topic

[JamesZero]

I've been having trouble with CV operations in the tactical level. It says AA shoots at planes friend or foe in their range, which makes sense with identifying and such but what about planes returning to or taking off from a carrier? I can't imagine the escort ships or the CV itself shooting all the carriers planes as soon as they take off or come to land but I haven't' noticed anything that contradicts that. I am sure there is something but I'm probably just missing it.

[Dave Franklin]

I don't play the Tactical Air rules, but I think what the rules intend is that in the middle of the strike combat against a task force, the AA of the defending ships will engage all formations in range,both friendly and enemy.  The carriers would not be doing launch and/or recovery in the middle of the battle, so it shouldn't be a factor.  In addition to the trigger-happy AA, the carriers would be maneuvering to avoid bombs and torpedoes, and thus aircraft would not be able to take off or land.

 

Of course, now you transition to the gamer, who doesn't care as much about that reality, and might be willing to put his carrier(s) and/or aircraft/pilots in a risky situation by moving the carrier on a straight course for a number of turns into the wind because his view as the "10,000 foot tall admiral" lets him know he can probably get away with it.  Thus if I were judging the game, my ruling would be "no, you can't launch and recover in the middle of the battle."

 

When not in the middle of a battle, you can launch and recover without the friendly AA shooting at them (though I believe I recall reading it did happen on occasion).

[Mark Hinds]

Yorktown launched fighters while under Japanese air attack during the battle of Midway.  Also, there were numerous other occasions during the Pacific War where this happened on the Japanese side.  FWIW. 

[Kenneth D. Hall]

Yorktown launched fighters while under Japanese air attack during the battle of Midway.  Also, there were numerous other occasions during the Pacific War where this happened on the Japanese side.  FWIW. 

Interesting point. One speculation is that launching might be one thing, recovering another. Fighters leaving the flight deck might be close enough to visually identify (plus they're flying away from the carrier). Consider recovery, though. You've got aircraft approaching astern, relatively low and slow, and all you see is the frontal silhouette. Are they friendlies trying to land...or enemy torpedo bombers?

 

Enterprise recovered planes from Yorktown when Yorktown was first hit at Midway, but Enterprise wasn't under air attack herself at the time. Imagine the pandemonium if she had. It would be interesting to review contemporary professional evaluations (board of inquiry, say) of Yorktown's actions during the air attacks. The AA/IFF considerations aside, the tradeoff for getting additional interceptors into the fight is the sacrifice of evasive maneuverability as a defensive measure, because you have to sail into the wind to launch aircraft.

 

It would also be useful in general to know how many aircraft on each side were knocked down by friendly AA during the war.

[Dave Franklin]

I agree that in the midst of maneuvering, launching would be easier than recovery.  Were I the GM, playing the tactical air rules, and at all inclined to allow it at all, I might allow take-offs at a reduced rate (and the ship heading into the wind), but not landings.

 

Personally, I would still enforce/apply the "AA engages all formations" rule too.  We just saw a couple of days ago a fratricide-like incident when Iran shot down the Ukrainian airliner that just took off from its own airport, and I've read numerous account of USN pilots where it talks about them being shot at by AA if they ventured too close to the task force.