Best Aircraft of the India-Burma-China Theatre

[Terry McGrady]

Terry - the original P-40's were the P-40B destined for Brits.

Having said that the P-40C quickly were delivered in January and P-40E in late March 1942 several months prior to becoming the 23rd FG.

Tex Hill made his first P-40C kills in January 1942 and his first three P-40E kills in April 1942.

I believe the AVG was disbanded on July 4th 1942 but I will check.

They were actually Tomahawk IIB similar but not the same as the P40B or C! 100 were supplied taken randomly from Tomahawk IIB production for the RAF , commencing with AK466
So did the AVG get more than the 100 Tomahawks IIB? Got Ex USAAF P40C ?
Btw the AVG was disbanded on 4th July 1942.

Just been reading about them in "Bloody Shambles part 2"
One thing about the Burma campaign was that ALL sides grossly overclaimed.

Cheers
Terry McGrady

 

[Terry McGrady]

The 449 squadron established total air superiority within 30 days operating out of India.
No other FS could make this claim in the CBI. The P38's used were earlier models of the airplane This was 1944.
A pilot from this squadron went MIA and was reported alive by U2 pilot F. Powers when he was returned to the U.S. on his debriefing.

.

For a realistic view of the 459 Sq ops I suggest you read Airwar over Burma by Chris Shores the final part of the " Bloody Shambles "Trilogy
Cheers
Terry McGrady

 

[carman1877]

Any one got any information about Gregory Boyington and what he did while with the AVG. The online sites I checked are vary vague. I know that he eventually was discharged but thats about it.

 

[renrich]

The AVG was disbanded on July 4, 1942. It is a myth that they engaged in battle with the Japanese prior to December 7, 1941.

 

[JoeB]

Just been reading about them in "Bloody Shambles part 2"
One thing about the Burma campaign was that ALL sides grossly overclaimed.

True, but claims become somewhat incidental once and if you have accurate accounts of losses on both sides. As far as AVG, many of its combats were outside the scope of Bloody Shambles, but fortunately there's "Flying Tigers" by Dan Ford, which uses basically similar Japanese sources as Shores and co-authors. AVG overclaims were very extreme in some early combats, but settled down quite a bit later. In terms of losses inflicted on the Japanese per Japanese accounts, the AVG was much more successful than other Allied fighter units in 1942. Again as I mentioned, most of their opponents were JAAF Type 97's, but some were Type 1's and they achieved a real (not claimed) ratio of around 3:1 against both types through the end of the AVG mid year 1942. Which was of course much less than they claimed, but OTOH few other Allied fighter units achieved even parity v Japanese ones in 1942 in real kill ratio. The average in the campaigns covered by Bloody Shambles 1 and 2 was several:1 the other way if you count it up, and Hurricanes still suffered 1: several ratio even in 1943 v Type 1's as I counted in "Air War over Burma" (aka Bloody Shambles part 3). Although, Allied fighters facing the JNAF Zeroes, though not in Burma where they seldom appeared, were arguably up against a stronger opponent, obviously when it came to Zero v Type 97.

Also there is sometimes, often grossly overstated but sometimes, a question about completeness of Japanese loss accounts. In JNAF case in 1942 there is hardly any such question, usually complete and detailed original combat reports for each unit are readily available. And we can draw inferences from that, eg. if a type/air arm did poorly v Zeroes and Type 1's per Bloody Shambles 12 it's probable that the Type 1 losses reported in Shambles (which are basically from the Japanese official history, plus perhaps some special info from co-author Izawa) are basically correct. And likewise if one Allied unit did much better than another, over a large sample of combats per available accounts purporting to report both sides' losses, it doesn't seem likely that finding a few more Japanese losses would change that *relative* picture dramatically. But in some cases there are genuine issues. I haven't read through BS3 to 1944 yet, but in late '43 over Rangoon it's clear that losses are reported for only some of the JAAF fighters units that were defending Rangoon at the time (v. P-51A's and P-38's escorting B-24's; those relatively advanced US fighters didn't do so well, less than 1:1, didn't even claim to do very well in that case). In most cases up to then, just a very few regiments equipped with Type 1's were in Burma in 1943, and it seems their losses are pretty well known. As a general rule, 'real' kill ratio calculation in the Pacific War gets more tricky later on, though OTOH over the years many fans of Allied fighters and units have claimed real Japanese losses are unknown when that's simply untrue in the particular cases they cited. In most cases those people (or authors for many years) never seriously looked.

Joe

 

[bachduong]

I don't currently have any questions, but it seemed to me that there are a large number of European Theatre/Third Reich threads, perhaps we also need one devoted to the "other" part of the war. In my mind the PTO includes pretty much any area where the Japanese were THE Axis power in the conflict. This would include China-Burma-India as well as Naval Operations against the Japanese in the Indiam Ocean.

Just for kicks we could also include the small squadrons of submarines which both Germany and Italy commited to the Far East (as opposed to German Cruiser U-Boat raids against British Shipping in the Indian Ocean) Oh hell, I'm kind of a Naval History guy myself, so if you really wanna talk about those operations here, we can do that, too!

If anybody wants to get a Naval thread going as well I'm interested. WWII os my main area of interest, but WWI and earlier conflicts can also be discussed.

Just to add a little specific content to this post? On this day in 1943 (Jan 7th) US MArine and Army strength on Guadalcanal reaches 50,000. They are opposed by 25,000 Japanese. Strategic encirclement has commenced (via Sealift). In Burma a Stalemate has begun near Arakan.

Take it away folks!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I don't currently have any questions, but it seemed to me that there are a large number of European Theatre/Third Reich threads, perhaps we also need one devoted to the "other" part of the war. In my mind the PTO includes pretty much any area where the Japanese were THE Axis power in the conflict. This would include China-Burma-India as well as Naval Operations against the Japanese in the Indiam Ocean.

Just for kicks we could also include the small squadrons of submarines which both Germany and Italy commited to the Far East (as opposed to German Cruiser U-Boat raids against British Shipping in the Indian Ocean) Oh hell, I'm kind of a Naval History guy myself, so if you really wanna talk about those operations here, we can do that, too!

If anybody wants to get a Naval thread going as well I'm interested. WWII os my main area of interest, but WWI and earlier conflicts can also be discussed.

Just to add a little specific content to this post? On this day in 1943 (Jan 7th) US MArine and Army strength on Guadalcanal reaches 50,000. They are opposed by 25,000 Japanese. Strategic encirclement has commenced (via Sealift). In Burma a Stalemate has begun near Arakan.

Take it away folks!

Why don't you try looking through the 5 years of posts on this site and you'll probably find your questions/ comments answered.

 

[parsifal]

I dont quite get this thread. Why are the choices so limited? I understand that later in the war there were P-51s on thee theatre, theen there are Beafighters, Mosquitoes, Hurricanes, P-36s, Fulmars. There may have been Ki-44s (But Im not sure) ....I just dont get it

 

[Colin1]

I dont quite get this thread. Why are the choices so limited? I understand that later in the war there were P-51s on thee theatre, theen there are Beafighters, Mosquitoes, Hurricanes, P-36s, Fulmars. There may have been Ki-44s (But Im not sure) ....I just dont get it

T'is a tad narrow
with two decent pilots, I wouldn't pit the Ki-27 against a P-40; it's a slug-out between the Ki-43 and the P-40, the theatre of operations just happens to be the CBI.

 

[JoeB]

T'is a tad narrow
with two decent pilots, I wouldn't pit the Ki-27 against a P-40; it's a slug-out between the Ki-43 and the P-40, the theatre of operations just happens to be the CBI.

On paper the Type 97 shouldn't have been much of a match for P-40 or other relatively modern Allied retractable wheel monoplanes in 1941-42. But other than against the AVG, it actually was pretty competitive in the general circumstances prevailing. Detailed combat by combat records of the JAAF in Philippines in 1941-42 didn't survive, but from their overall losses, surviving specific accounts and US claims it's clear USAAF P-40's didn't do much if at all better than 1:1 v Type 97's (they also met in one combat in DEI which is documented, one loss on each side). One of the units they faced, 50th Sentai, was later in action in Burma v the AVG, actually. Likewise the Hurricane's 1942 record v Type 97 was only~3:2 and Buffalo's much worse. The AVG was the only unit that turned in strongly advantageous results v the Type 97 in the early Pacific War. Otherwise probably 'decent' Allied pilots faced other disadvantages that put their retractable carriage fighters at surprisingly little if any advantage v the fixed wheel very lightly armed Type 97, piloted by a JAAF with much recent combat experience.

Joe