Procrastintor
Senior Airman
Daaaaang Flyboy, that's probably the most beautiful thing I have seen all day.
Best strategy to avoid nuking Japan
- Thread starter wuzak
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GregP
Major
Hi Zjtins,
I might point out that the Fiat R A 1050 Tifone was a license-built copy of the DB 605A-1 and never quite made the power of the original DB engines. The Japanese Aichi Kokuki AE12A Atsuta was a license-built copy of the DB 601A engine that also never quite made the power the DB did and was so difficult to copy, tune, and maintain that they abandoned it and switched back to radial engines.
Copies are rarely exact and performance differences can be on both sides. That is, the copy can perform better, worse, or about the same as the original. It depends on who is copying and how skilled they are at design. My current project is a rare Bell YP-59A Airacomet with GE I-16 engines. These were the first American improvement to the Whittle jet engine (the GE I-A was a copy of the Whittle engine, the I-16 was our first improvement). The original Whittle engine made 1,200 – 1,250 pounds of thrust and the I-16 makes 1,600 – 1,650 with only minor changes. Later the same engine with minor tweaking made 2,000 pounds of thrust as the J-31 when the jet engine naming scheme was put into place.
Our museum (Planes of Fame) happens to have a real, live Mitsubishi J8M Shusui rocket interceptor (1 of only 7 ever built) as well as a real, live German Me 163 rocket engine (and a real WWII German RATO unit to boot). The Japanese rocket engine is close, but not quite an exact copy.
We also have a unique individual from Japan who comes over to the USA about 3 times per year just to help work on the planes. He is trying his best to help with our Aichi D3A Val dive bomber that is slowly coming along, We need to finish some other things and then get to it. He was, in fact, here when we took the gas tanks out of our Yokoshuk D4Y Judy dive bomber that we restored. His father worked at the Yokosuka arsenal and had signed one of the fuel tanks from our Judy! He said his father told him the Atsuta was as an exact copy of the DB 601A as they could make … and it didn't exactly work well. In service the Japanese mechanics could not keep it in tune. They were all trained on radials.
Too many solid sources confirm the Japanese jet engine to be based on German documents for it to be much in doubt.
Just as an aside, we also have a Juno 004 and a real Me 163, too, and used to have an Me 262 before we sold it to Paul Allen. We never have had a Japanese jet engine as used on the Kikka, but have the drawings. They are almost exactly the same as German drawings ... except for the Japanese writing on them, of course. Minor changes.
Also, we fly the only Mitsubishi A6M5 Model 52 Zero in the world that still uses the original Japanese engine (a Nakajima Sakae 21) and propeller. The prop is a license-built copy of a Hamilton-Standard and the parts look interchangeable ... but we haven't tried it since the prop is balanced, is not leaking, and is flying just fine. The splines are standard. So we KNOW they could copy things quite exactly since we are flying WWII Japanese copies of several mechanical items today on WWII Japanese aircraft. We'd LOVE to find real Japanese engines for our D3A Val but might have to use an American radial when we get there if we can't find two. The museum doesn't fly any plane unless we have a minimum of two engines. If you break it, you have to get it home somehow ...
I might point out that the Fiat R A 1050 Tifone was a license-built copy of the DB 605A-1 and never quite made the power of the original DB engines. The Japanese Aichi Kokuki AE12A Atsuta was a license-built copy of the DB 601A engine that also never quite made the power the DB did and was so difficult to copy, tune, and maintain that they abandoned it and switched back to radial engines.
Copies are rarely exact and performance differences can be on both sides. That is, the copy can perform better, worse, or about the same as the original. It depends on who is copying and how skilled they are at design. My current project is a rare Bell YP-59A Airacomet with GE I-16 engines. These were the first American improvement to the Whittle jet engine (the GE I-A was a copy of the Whittle engine, the I-16 was our first improvement). The original Whittle engine made 1,200 – 1,250 pounds of thrust and the I-16 makes 1,600 – 1,650 with only minor changes. Later the same engine with minor tweaking made 2,000 pounds of thrust as the J-31 when the jet engine naming scheme was put into place.
Our museum (Planes of Fame) happens to have a real, live Mitsubishi J8M Shusui rocket interceptor (1 of only 7 ever built) as well as a real, live German Me 163 rocket engine (and a real WWII German RATO unit to boot). The Japanese rocket engine is close, but not quite an exact copy.
We also have a unique individual from Japan who comes over to the USA about 3 times per year just to help work on the planes. He is trying his best to help with our Aichi D3A Val dive bomber that is slowly coming along, We need to finish some other things and then get to it. He was, in fact, here when we took the gas tanks out of our Yokoshuk D4Y Judy dive bomber that we restored. His father worked at the Yokosuka arsenal and had signed one of the fuel tanks from our Judy! He said his father told him the Atsuta was as an exact copy of the DB 601A as they could make … and it didn't exactly work well. In service the Japanese mechanics could not keep it in tune. They were all trained on radials.
Too many solid sources confirm the Japanese jet engine to be based on German documents for it to be much in doubt.
Just as an aside, we also have a Juno 004 and a real Me 163, too, and used to have an Me 262 before we sold it to Paul Allen. We never have had a Japanese jet engine as used on the Kikka, but have the drawings. They are almost exactly the same as German drawings ... except for the Japanese writing on them, of course. Minor changes.
Also, we fly the only Mitsubishi A6M5 Model 52 Zero in the world that still uses the original Japanese engine (a Nakajima Sakae 21) and propeller. The prop is a license-built copy of a Hamilton-Standard and the parts look interchangeable ... but we haven't tried it since the prop is balanced, is not leaking, and is flying just fine. The splines are standard. So we KNOW they could copy things quite exactly since we are flying WWII Japanese copies of several mechanical items today on WWII Japanese aircraft. We'd LOVE to find real Japanese engines for our D3A Val but might have to use an American radial when we get there if we can't find two. The museum doesn't fly any plane unless we have a minimum of two engines. If you break it, you have to get it home somehow ...
Greg, I didn't know this is what you do. Do me a favor. Go to the Hellcat and Spitfire thread and give me an opinion on my last question. It ought to be on the last page. Thanks.
Be more specific. We are waiting...
http://www.classicjets.org/content/2011-amt-year-joe-morales
Good on yer, Joe. Nice to put a face to the name.
Last edited:
Such things were not needed to be known exactly. You are presuming the Japanese had no prior knowledge on the subject, but they did and using a engineering diagram would give them plenty of information to work with. The hardness and finish would come from their own understanding of the subject matter. I'm pretty certain that they could build a working jet engine based on a drawing, considering that their warships had been driven by steam turbines for some years earlier.
Well, that's where you're wrong, because "copy" means an imitation or reproduction of an original item. A copy does not have to be exact, as Greg pointed out earlier. You are confusing "copy" with "replica", which is an exact reproduction of an original object by the original creator.
I don't have Max Hastings' book "Retribution" before me (it was a library book) but Max makes the claim that President Truman never made the decision to drop the bomb on Japan. He wrote, as I remember, that Truman was informed of its existence but only in Truman's autobiography does the President write of making this decision. Instead, according to Max Hastings, the bomb was going to drop unless Truman stopped it.
To me, this has the ring of authenticity. Every great man wishes to remold history a little.
To me, this has the ring of authenticity. Every great man wishes to remold history a little.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I believe you can find transparency care in both flight manuals and maintenance manuals.I am laughing so hard right now!
I've not read that Hastings book but am very familiar with much of his writing.
I would be astounded if that was Hasting's conclusion. Foreign Affairs, Vol. XXV, No. 2 (January, 1957) is probably one of the most complete accounts of the decision making process. Along with the various memoirs of those involved (like Groves, Leahy, King, Stimson and of course Truman himself) and the various hearings held by Congress the evidence that ultimately the decision to use the weapon(s) was Truman's and his alone is hard to refute.
There was a consultation process of course, no such momentous decision is made in a democracy without seeking opinion as widely as possible given the security limitations. The so called "Interim Committee" made a compelling report in favour of using the weapon but it was Truman who had to make the decision. He was President and as the sign on his desk famously said "The Buck Stops Here."
It does seem that the dropping of the second bomb surprised Truman, but it wouldn't be the first time that one green light was interpreted as a whole series down the strip by military men. I think it highly probable that the THIRD bomb would have been dropped had Truman not stopped it.
Cheers
Steve
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
And I was pondering this last night...
What was the plan if the Japanese did not surrender after the two atomic bombs had been dropped? The U.S. did not have a ready reserve of atom bombs, though more could be assembled over time.
With the Japanese digging in across the homeland and a considerable force still on the Asian mainland, what would be the next step since the "Genie had been let out of the bottle"?
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
According to Hell to Pay by DM Giangreco the invasion would have occurred. Interestingly even if the invasion had occurred, there was talk of using a number of atomic bombs (3 -4 IIRC) to help soften the target of Kyushu and prevent Japanese reinforcements.
Procrastintor
Senior Airman
If the invasion would've gone down things would've gotten... interesting.
Col. Tibbits and a crew were back in the US to pick up some of the components of another bomb when Japan surrendered.
I'll make an effort to reacquire Max's book before writing more but do recall that that was at least his supposition.
The "hardware" had already shipped. The nuclear component never left the US and seems to have been stopped on Truman's orders.
Cheers
Steve
Thank you. Copy and similar to at totally different. A copy means you have all the information needed to manufacture the parts then assemble the unit. Of course they used the photos WITH THEIR OWN knowledge to do what they could. Like I said they did what they could but that is not a copy and it ended up less capable because it was not a copy.
What airline do you fly or work for? If the most important information you glean out of pilots manual or CMM are clean windshields I want to fly any other airline.
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
And now you shall - welcome to cyberspace buthead, enjoy the rest of your life flying an armchair!
BTW - I don't work for an airline, evidently you didn't read my bio!
Last edited:
Sorry for being so long in replying as I promised to do when I had Max Hastings' book, "Retribution" before me. I wish I could put the blame on some family or business matter but it is only due to inertia on my part.
The Japanese government had been appealing to the Russians to negotiate a peace treaty with the Allies. Their conditions were: preservation of Japanese hegemony in Korea and Manchuria, no occupation and for Japan to have the right to conduct any war crime trials. They felt the difficulty of allied invasion would be enough to force acceptance of these conditions. Meanwhile, the combination of submarine blockade, the B-29 bombardment, the maturing atomic bomb program and Russia's plan to enter the conflict was rapidly diminishing the need for invasion.
Now Hastings writes that America's military programs and campaigns were approved by the civilian government and then put into the hands of the military to carry out. In the case of the Manhattan Project this consisted both of thousands of workers in the United States and the military having the special planes built, special training of their crews and the posting of this unit to theater.
Roosevelt died leaving a not very well briefed Vice President. Truman didn't know of the magic intercepts or of the Manhattan Project. According to Hastings, the new President met with Stimson and Groves where he was merely informed of the project. There was no mention of Truman having to make a historic decision. Rather, it was just accepted wisdom that the bomb, if available, would be used. Furthermore, Hastings goes on to explain that the bomb was considered at the time, both by civilians and military, as simply a more efficient explosive. It was Groves idea to employ two bombs, probably (my words) to sample the effects of both types.
In conclusion, Hastings asserts that Truman falsely claimed to have given the order to nuke Hiroshima "perhaps because he feared that it would seem shocking to posterity to acknowledge that there was no such moment of deliberate presidential judgment..."
The Japanese government had been appealing to the Russians to negotiate a peace treaty with the Allies. Their conditions were: preservation of Japanese hegemony in Korea and Manchuria, no occupation and for Japan to have the right to conduct any war crime trials. They felt the difficulty of allied invasion would be enough to force acceptance of these conditions. Meanwhile, the combination of submarine blockade, the B-29 bombardment, the maturing atomic bomb program and Russia's plan to enter the conflict was rapidly diminishing the need for invasion.
Now Hastings writes that America's military programs and campaigns were approved by the civilian government and then put into the hands of the military to carry out. In the case of the Manhattan Project this consisted both of thousands of workers in the United States and the military having the special planes built, special training of their crews and the posting of this unit to theater.
Roosevelt died leaving a not very well briefed Vice President. Truman didn't know of the magic intercepts or of the Manhattan Project. According to Hastings, the new President met with Stimson and Groves where he was merely informed of the project. There was no mention of Truman having to make a historic decision. Rather, it was just accepted wisdom that the bomb, if available, would be used. Furthermore, Hastings goes on to explain that the bomb was considered at the time, both by civilians and military, as simply a more efficient explosive. It was Groves idea to employ two bombs, probably (my words) to sample the effects of both types.
In conclusion, Hastings asserts that Truman falsely claimed to have given the order to nuke Hiroshima "perhaps because he feared that it would seem shocking to posterity to acknowledge that there was no such moment of deliberate presidential judgment..."
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
