Help support TMP


"Dogfight at Kaneohe - CY6 AAR" Topic


14 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Aviation Battle Reports Message Board


Areas of Interest

World War Two in the Air

Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

1:285th Scale Sturmoviks from C-in-C

Beowulf Fezian paints up some WWII Soviet aircraft.


Featured Workbench Article

Basing Small-Scale Aircraft for Wargames

Mal Wright Fezian experiments to find a better way to mount aircraft for wargaming.


Featured Profile Article

Council of Five Nations 2010

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian is back from Council of Five Nations.


Featured Book Review


1,248 hits since 5 Jan 2012
©1994-2026 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

MacSparty05 Jan 2012 6:34 a.m. PST

I posted some photos of a recent small CY6 game along with a brief AAR. It's a home-made scenario representing one of the small fights that took place on the morning of Dec 7, 1941. Two American P-36 against two Zeroes. Once again, CY6 proves to be a great game!

link

Oddball05 Jan 2012 7:10 a.m. PST

I have to wait til after work to see your AAR, work blocks your site. What stats did you use for the P-36?

Please post them if you can.

MacSparty05 Jan 2012 7:21 a.m. PST

Oddball,

We ended up going with the Hawk 75 stats listed under the French in the book. I don't have that with me at the moment, but what did cause us some consternation is the Hawk 75 is listed as a move A, while the P-40 under the US aircraft is listed as a B. Since the P-40 is a derivative of the P-36, we debated about making the P-36 a B, but ended up going with the A. I'm still open to changing that.

I'm pretty sure the Hawk 75 is listed at A4 +3, but I'd have to look in the book to confirm.

Mikhail Lerementov05 Jan 2012 9:23 a.m. PST

The Hawk is three feet shorter and about a ton lighter than the P-40. The wing loading on the 36 is only 24 lbs while the 40 is 35 so I would expect the 36 to have a shorter turn radius.

Oddball05 Jan 2012 9:25 a.m. PST

Thanks, I'm also thinking of what stats to use with the P-26 for Philippines Air Force.

MacSparty05 Jan 2012 9:34 a.m. PST

Excellent explanation Mikhail! I'm no engineer. We really wondered about that, as the stats seemed to make it a good match for the Zero. Mostly it was just bad flying on my part…

zippyfusenet05 Jan 2012 9:54 a.m. PST

Isn't there a special, super-maneuverable CY6 movement chart exclusively for the A6M2 Zero? Some folks feel that the A movement chart doesn't do the Zero justice.

svsavory05 Jan 2012 10:49 a.m. PST

Looks like a fun little game, thanks. I like your P-36s.

Oddball05 Jan 2012 10:53 a.m. PST

The special movement chart was done for A6M2 Zero with drop tanks. It was done for the 'Canal campaign book.

The A6M2 Zero stats in the rules show a very manuverable aircraft at lower speeds and acceptable at higher speeds.

Mikhail Lerementov05 Jan 2012 12:43 p.m. PST

The 36 is a fair match for the A6M2 except in climb. The Zero has a 22 lb. wingloading. It is also better armed with the two 20mm cannon. Probably the reason the 36 did so poorly at Pearl is novices up against professionals. Plus the Zero in trouble could go upstairs like a high speed elevator. It was a Hawk that scored the first kill for the French if I recall correctly.

MacSparty05 Jan 2012 12:49 p.m. PST

Good points, Mikhail. In the game, the P-36s only have four light machine guns. I did hit him once, but rolled so low on the d4 that the Zero just kept going. The Zero's cannons roll d10, so pack much more punch in game terms compared to the P-36.

Oddball05 Jan 2012 2:06 p.m. PST

Mikhail,

You are right on the French kill, early in the war, '39.

The Hawk Squadrons in the French Army of the Air had the best kill to loss ratio in the Battle for France.

Only problem there were only 6 squadrons of Hawk 75s if I remember correctly.

Oddball05 Jan 2012 2:07 p.m. PST

Mikhail,

You are right on the French kill, early in the war, '39.

The Hawk Squadrons in the French Army of the Air had the best kill to loss ratio in the Battle for France.

Only problem there were only 6 squadrons of Hawk 75s if I remember correctly.

Oh, ya, finally got home to read the AAR. Thanks for sharing.

Gozerius28 Jan 2012 8:42 p.m. PST

The trouble with the P-36s at Pearl was they were rushed into the air without properly installing the guns. At least one aircraft landed with breach plugs still in the guns.
They were armed with one light and one heavy machine gun

David Akin did a superb write up of this action in Air Journal back in 2002(?)

The actual combat started with four P-36s bouncing six Zeros, which were shortly joined by three more. The Americans lost one plane and pilot with the rest suffering damage. The Japanese suffered several damaged planes, but no losses.
The P-36 was avery maneuverable plane, on par with a Zero, but it was undergunned and was only operational with a couple squadrons at Pearl. Only a few got off the ground, but acquitted themselves well, one shooting down a pair of Kates.
The RAF used Hawk 75A-4s (Mohawk IVs) in a couple squadrons in India and Burma, 1942-43. The Dutch had a squadron of Hawk 75A-7s in the East Indies. These were Wright Cyclone powered models. The USAAF and the Armee d'Aire used Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasps. About forty ex-French and ex-Norwegian Hawks were sold by Germany to the Finns in 1941, just before Operation Barbarossa. Thes were the second best performing aircraft in the Finnish Air Force before the introduction of Messerschmitt 109Gs in 1943.
Most foreign operated Hawks were armed with either 4 or 6 light machine guns, but the Finns started replacing the nose guns with heavy machine guns in 1942.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.