junkman3353
Airman
- 31
- Jun 1, 2019
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Firstly the 8th AF command structure in England DID NOT PHYSICALLY MOVE to the Pacific. The "move" occurred administratively by renaming existing headquarters units. In the official wording the 8th AF HQ in England ceased to exist and "Transferred, without personnel, equipment and combat elements to Okinawa on 16 July 1945."After VE day there were plans in the works to move many fighter groups from Europe to the Pacific in anticipation of invading Japan. It had progressed so far as the 8th AF command structure having already moved to Okinawa before VJ day. To that end a number of 8th AF groups (4th, 359th, 364th for certain) were given WW P-47s to transition from the P-51 to the P-47N. My question is why? All were widely experienced in P-51's both in operation and maintenance. Why not continue with what they knew? Was it to spread out the production so North American wasn't the sole source of fighter aircraft?
Sadly there were next to no plans to reoccupy any of SEA beyond Singapore and the Borneo operations carried out between May and July 1945.Apart from the invasion of Japan the allies were aiming to recapture parts of South East Asia, where there was a lot of oil, rubber and tin, whose populations were beginning to starve.
The title 8th Air Force moved to the Pacific, along with a few people like General Spaatz. The following from Air Force Combat Units of World War II Author: Maurer, Maurer Date: 1986I can see (and appreciate) the big picture in all this but my main question pertained to why so many ETO fighter groups equipped with Mustangs were going to be issued P-47N's prior to transfer to the Pacific. Was it to spread the production out between defense plants, was P-51 production maxed out in CA and TX and Republic had excess capacity?
Note I said allies and parts of South East Asia where there was a lot of oil, rubber and tin, whose populations were beginning to starve. The end of major amphibious operations in Europe by the end of 1944 freed a lot of British controlled landing craft for the war against Japan, along with military forces and shipping. Retaking key parts of Asia had political, military and economic advantages. As far as I know there were at best ideas about operations in Thailand (Neutral as far as the US was concerned), French Indo China and further north, while the plans were to only take key points of the Dutch East Indies.Sadly there were next to no plans to reoccupy any of SEA beyond Singapore and the Borneo operations carried out between May and July 1945.
Geoffrey - FWIIW the Red Menace dictated transfer of 355th and 357th FG intact to Germany, re-assigned to 8th AF on or before July 16th, to Gablingen and Naubiburg respectiverly.When the war In Europe ended all the USAAF groups would have had a mixture of personnel from the just starting to just ending tours, a point is whether it was complete units to be transferred or Just personnel, probably a mixture. The cut backs in training would push the need for transfers of existing personnel to the Pacific. While the 8th AF fighter units and control systems had the long range bomber escort experience the Pacific was expecting to need.
8th AF 31 July 1945, 56th P-47, 339th P-51, all other groups have P-51 and between 3 and 9 P-47 on strength, 161 P-47, 556 P-51
9th AF 22 July 1945, still one type per group, or no aircraft at all, 33 P-38, 713 P-47, 120 P-51
The P-51H actually had slightly more Ferry range with same external tank - despite 14 gals less intrnal fuel - because it had less drag than the P-51D (and B). For the forseeable adversary USSR, there was little difference in practical combat radius of the P-51D/P-47N vs the longer range P-82.Given all the writings on the 8th AF fighter units there should be published comment somewhere about the post war P-47 arrivals.
The P-51H had a little less range than the P-51D, making the P-47N (and P-82) the long range fighters for 1946.
Not sure about red menace in 1945, the US deployments were about governing ex axis powers, demobilisation and dealing with US property overseas. The 9th AF HQ would become the main USAAF unit in Europe and its units would form most of the strength but drawing on the other air forces present.FWIIW the Red Menace dictated transfer of 355th and 357th FG intact to Germany, re-assigned to 8th AF on or before July 16th, to Gablingen and Naubiburg respectiverly.
Regarding the P-51H range would it be more correct to say with slightly less internal fuel and a more powerful engine using more fuel in combat the H combat radius was slightly less than the D?The P-51H actually had slightly more Ferry range with same external tank - despite 14 gals less intrnal fuel - because it had less drag than the P-51D (and B). For the forseeable adversary USSR, there was little difference in practical combat radius of the P-51D/P-47N vs the longer range P-82.
During the war the 20th AF received from the US the 413th, 414th, 506th and 507th FG, the 506th had P-51, the others P-47IIRC there were only P-47N FGs stationed in Phillipines, whereas the Occupation of Japan called for 'All P-51D TO&E' including conversion of P-38FG to P-51. These FG were augmented by F-80 and then F-84 in the 1947-1950 timeframe. This is a debatable point, and your sources may be better than mine.
As above agreed about fighter deployments with the proviso I have not done a lot of checking.I remain 'fuzzy' on deployment to UK during the Berlin Crisis but linger on the belief that no P-47N Fs were deployed from east coast of US to accompany B-29/B-50s while B-36 remained in US and P-51H assigned to ADC? Thoughts?
I am aware of only the 55th, 354th, 355th and 357th FG serving with P-51Ds as full combat groups at end of July 1945. That said, the 357th was the first to wind down in summer 1945, then the 354th December 1945, then 355th by Apil 1946. The 55th converted to P-80 in 1946, then reconstitued as 33rd FG. I;m not sure of the latter and too lazy to look at Maurer.Not sure about red menace in 1945, the US deployments were about governing ex axis powers, demobilisation and dealing with US property overseas. The 9th AF HQ would become the main USAAF unit in Europe and its units would form most of the strength but drawing on the other air forces present.
Having documents is one thing, going through them to understand exactly what they report is another. Even if a unit was present in 1946 or later it was generally not at the wartime strength. I have tracked Bomber Command, the 8th and 15th AF to end 1945, along with US Army deployments.
On 2nd January 1946 the US Army ETO mass redeployment program is ended, with some 3,044,985 troops sent to the far east or US since 12th May 1945. End December 1945 the 95 US divisions (6 Marine) available in August 1944 were down to 46, 22 in the Pacific, 0 in the Mediterranean and 10 in the European Theatre. The now ex 8th AF was down to 4 Bomb and 3 fighter groups. The bomb groups had been doing a lot of transport work in places like North Africa regardless of where they were officially based. The remaining groups locations, 92nd BG to France Jun 1945, 305th BG to Belgium Jul 45, Germany Dec 45, 306th BG to Germany Dec 45, 384th BG to France Jun 45. 55th FG to Germany 22 Jul 45, 355th FG to Germany 3 Jul 45, 357th FG to Germany 21 Jul 45. All would disband/inactivate in 1946. The ex 15th AF was down to the 2nd Bomb Group, which would disband in Italy in February 1946. A quick look at the 9th AF shows 4 fighter groups still in Europe end 1945, 2 would disband in 1946 leaving the 36th and 366th both with P-47, the former going to P-80 end 1947. From the Mediterranean the 27th and 79th FG with P-47 were present until mid 1947. It looks like the post war European USAAF mostly used P-47.
Agreed. And there were never enough P/F-82s to serve as escort to Moscow. AFAIK no P-47Ns went farther east than east coast of US.As far as I am aware there were no post war deployments of P-47 or P-51H units from the US, not even sure any P-47N were sent to Europe as replacements, P-47D used until the jets arrived. Given Berlin to Moscow is about 1,000 miles and London to Moscow around 1,550 miles there were not a lot of USSR strategic targets within the range of a Europe based P-47 or P-51.
That is an interesting question. At 67"MP there would be zero difference in cruise or combat settings. At 75", the same but WI increased MP to 80/90"MP.Regarding the P-51H range would it be more correct to say with slightly less internal fuel and a more powerful engine using more fuel in combat the H combat radius was slightly less than the D?
The 35th and 18th still had P-51s on June 25th, 1950. My father was 35th FG CO when we were at Johnson AFB in 1948.The P-51 equipped 35th FG from 5th AF moved to Okinawa in June 1945, there may be others.
Interesting balance. I know the ETO Mustang groups were losing aircraft due to attrition, with zero new replacements - and Groups were consolidated into squadrons by fall 1945. Seems like the P-47D equipped FGs maintained TO&E as the Mustang personnel left for home.The P-38 was largely eliminated from the inventory in 1946, while there was around a 1 to 1 ratio P-47 to P-51 in the Air Force it was around 4 to 3 overseas. End 1947 the ETO had 554 P-47 and 190 P-51, the Pacific Area had 276 P-47 to 414 P-51. The 1948 USAF Statistical Digest demotes all the piston engine fighters to 2nd line and misc. in July, the June figures are 1,500 P-47 to 1,953 P-51 in the Air Force, 606 and 622 overseas.
good info, thanks,The day fighter units that stayed in the western Pacific area post war were P-51 or moved to P-51 post war. When the Korean War started the US had just finished moving the last of the P-51 units in the area to jets, some reverted to the P-51 for fighter bomber operations.
As above agreed about fighter deployments with the proviso I have not done a lot of checking.
The Berlin blockade began on 24 June 1948, this did little to overall USAAF deployments overseas, in fact numbers kept going down, from 4,894 in January (2,435 1st line combat) to 4,093 (2,050 1st line combat) in December. However B-29 deployed overseas went from 125 in June to 181 in July.
First attachment from AVIA 9/40 Report by Professor Jewkes, Lyttleton Mission to the U.S.A, second and third from AIR 20/2858.