The preferred drop altitute was 18,000 ft for the Fritz X, and lower than that for thev Hs 293, that's within the effective range of anything 5 in. and up. And within the possible range of smaller stuff.
Kamikaze: Ever had a chance of success?
- Thread starter gjs238
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
I do not believe that to achieve a negotiated peace could be more than a vague hope in someone's head in the the higher levels of the Japanese government and military, and it seems more an explanation a posteriori. At that time, only to talk about a peace deal, which, given the situation on the field, could only be on the pejorative basis compared to pre-war situation, and then a declaration of defeat, could lead to serious personal consequences. I do not think that has ever been made an organized speech like: "if we send our aircrafts to crash on American ships, then we can negotiate peace without having to surrender"
The need to "save face" had led to a vicious circle, so, in order to avoid having to admit in front of their subordinates, and even to themselves, to have wasted so many lives, Japanese decision makers had to waste even more, and eventually led to the suicide of many of the decision makers themself.
The kamilaze were not a way to win, or to negotiate, but only a way to keep fighting when conventional methods seemed to have become useless, since every alternative to keep fighting was unthinkable, or at least not speakable.
The need to "save face" had led to a vicious circle, so, in order to avoid having to admit in front of their subordinates, and even to themselves, to have wasted so many lives, Japanese decision makers had to waste even more, and eventually led to the suicide of many of the decision makers themself.
The kamilaze were not a way to win, or to negotiate, but only a way to keep fighting when conventional methods seemed to have become useless, since every alternative to keep fighting was unthinkable, or at least not speakable.
- Thread starter
- #24
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
it was pretty divided from what i understand...close to 50/50 peace vs keep fighting. there was a large portion of the military that wanted to continue hostilities. what their reasons were i have no idea. fortunately for the sake of peace the emperor was on the side that wanted to sue for peace. there was a coup planned to prevent the emperor from making the radio broadcast that didnt work...otherwise ???????
OldSkeptic
Senior Airman
- 509
- May 17, 2010
Yes but by that time the Japanese had used up all their well trained pilots.
Even more than the Germans they had gone a 'short war' strategy, without all the industrial and training infrastructure necessary.
Their ovarall strategy was to give the US a 'black eye', then negotiate a settlement, which recognised their claims in Asia.
In the beginning they probably had the the finest carrier pilots around, but when they lost those they were quickly reduced to very poorly trained pilots.
Plus their technical advantage (very significant at first) had been lost.
So given that, throwing poorly trained pilots into kamikaze attacks made sense. One poorly trained pilot vs taking out a ship? Made a mad sort of sense.
So doing it at the beginning of the war, with their superior pilots and planes, made no sense, so they didn't.
After that when they were down to poor pilots and inferior planes, then they did it.
CobberKane
Banned
- 706
- Apr 4, 2012
Very roughly, the progression of US thinking in terms of bombing was: "we will bomb industry while minimising civilian casualties", to "we will bomb industry and unfortunately kill lots of civilians" to "we will bomb cities, and thereby destroy industry and kill civilians".
Bottom line, by 1945 everyone was happy to bomb civilians, no matter how it in order not to offend sensibilities.
On the other hand, not all protagonists made a policy of working POWs to death or making suicide a tactic, so there were some pretty clear differences too.
Last edited:
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
While 18,000ft is clearly within the theoretical AA ceiling of this weapon, that doesn´t make it automatically within effective AA ceiling / effective range of the US 5"/38. -nor most other AA (there´s no 5" up in shipboard AAA, except for SP guns desperately trying to do AAA).
The definition for "effective" is that a 400 mph airplane needs to be taken under fire for at least 20 seconds, and that additionally the fuses need to be operable at the range. This condition is fulfilled by multiple solutions with regard to range / altitude / vector combination. Hit rate for high altitude (larger 10,000ft) work was very poor and dropped with increasing range / altitude.
The case of USS SAVANNA, operating under an air umbrella of USAAF P-38 in addition to radar guided 5" AAA makes it clear. The Fritz X was released at 18,700 ft and the carrier planes, albeit precisely tracked for some time were considered out of effective engagement range for the shipboard 5"/38 which didn´t open fire. P38 and AAA tried to take down the Fritz X without success.
The Fritz X could be released at any altitude within 4km (min. 13,100ft) and 9km (29,500ft), but I doubt the japanese had carrier planes for very high altitude drops.
Kamikaze would have been more dangerous had they concentrated on troop ships, transports, oiler, and the general fleet train instead of the warships as they did. The soft targets are more diffcult to protect (usually withotu good subdivision and firefighting capacities required to deal with Kamikaze hits), carry more important war material and are easier to sink (slower, slow on helm, less crew, less structural strength).
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
The solution should have been clear: the Ohka with a pulsejet engine. Or simply licence produce the Fieseler Fi-103R manned flying bomb. Impossible to intercept for the F-4U-1 or F-6F. And a 800-1,000 kg bomb.
I believe that flight training of these pilots could be reduced to extensive ground training and a single flight. Not ideal but should be sufficient. All they need to know is how to handle the controls. Not to take off, not to land, not to take evasive manoeuvres ...
Kris
I believe that flight training of these pilots could be reduced to extensive ground training and a single flight. Not ideal but should be sufficient. All they need to know is how to handle the controls. Not to take off, not to land, not to take evasive manoeuvres ...
Kris
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
Does anyone know what the range/radius of US Navy CAP was? If it was less than 200 miles, the carrier aircraft for the Fi-103R would be safe. And the Fi-103R would be in the clear.
Btw, there was a Japanese pulsejet design, the Kawanishi Baika, but this was a much smaller design with only a 250 kg bombload.
Kris
Btw, there was a Japanese pulsejet design, the Kawanishi Baika, but this was a much smaller design with only a 250 kg bombload.
Kris
Last edited:
I don't see that. The American advantage was too great.
Let's just top this question off with the rationale was never really there before the Marianas to give this question any real serious consideration. To really appreciate that one has to understand this wasn't the result of insanity or anything like that but rather was purely a rational decision. The way things looked in October 1944 these pilots were all but dying in vain. The pilots in the Marianas who just came off those nine carriers were trained combat pilots with maybe half their squadron training under their belts and left nothing to show for it. A number of those pilots made it back to those carriers or Rota or Guam and by October 1944 were hardened combat veterans. The command were the guys who struggled with the idea the most. Just think if just 25 of those pilots had been suicide pilots with 250kg bombs under their aircraft, how effective they could have been. Once the command made the decision, the pilots jumped at it. If you're going to die, why die in vain? But that rationale wasn't there while Japan still had hope. Could Japan have hurt us had they instituted the program before they lost hope? Definitely, yes. But, then, they would have been insane. And, they weren't.
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
the rationale wasnt there but the strong conviction of the japanese people/solder was. by this i mean had they asked for kamakazie pilots at any time they would have had volunteers...whether they were winning or losing.
- Thread starter
- #34
There was at least one Kamakaze at Pearl Harbor. Not a true Kamakaze, but a suicide dive by one of the torpedo planes with a holed fuel tank.
He knew his minutes in the air was limited, and parachuting out to be captured was unthinkable.
His name is know.
He knew his minutes in the air was limited, and parachuting out to be captured was unthinkable.
His name is know.
Tom, according to The Divine Wind, the concept arose from the practice of suicide-crashing into bombers. They figured, why not make the targets these big carriers they've been trying to get all this time? It was said the commanders had tears in their eyes as they decided to put the first squadron to the cause, as they knew the pilots would embrace it enthusiastically, which is exactly what happened.
What's the difference between that and a bomb run except in the former you're wasting a pilot and aircraft that can be utilized in another bomb run? What I really hear you asking is why they didn't make more bomb runs. They had the aircraft suited for that. At Midway it was our SBDs that wrecked those carriers. By October 1944 they were hurting for pilots who could perform those tricks, even if they had the aircraft suited for it.
Last edited:
Not just the Japanese.
SS General Wolff worked on the manned V1 (Fi 103 R) project at the same time as the Ba 349 project, which was under SS control. At one point it seemed like the "Natter" might be developed as a one way suicide attacker too. Other people on the Bachem project were taken aback by this development but Wolff assured them that he already had "1000s" of volunteers for the one way V-1.
He also told Willy Fiedler that he could immediately call up 100 volunteers to ram Ba 349s into B-17 bombers.
Cheers
Steve
Russians rammed their opponents, too, especially early in the war. I-16's were known for their ramming tactics.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I agree that using trained pilots for these suicide missions is a dead end. Germany and Japan suffered from great shortages of properly trained or experienced pilots.
What has not been properly mentioned in this discussion is that some aircraft would not require properly trained pilots. The F-103R, Ohka or Ba 349 pilots would not need to practice take off and landing, and did not need to learn any evasive actions as they relied on superior speed. All what was needed was sufficient ground training, to learn the instruments, and a couple of glider training sessions.
Given the fact that the Japanese and German air forces were neutralized through a lack of pilots and fuel, these kind of emergency weapons were really the only thing left. The Japanese would have had an amazing anti-ship weapon with the Baika, especially if it was a copy of the Fi 103R. And the Germans had a potent bomber destroyer with the Ba 349. Very unconventional but I believe that they would have proven to be effective, had the war lasted longer.
Kris
What has not been properly mentioned in this discussion is that some aircraft would not require properly trained pilots. The F-103R, Ohka or Ba 349 pilots would not need to practice take off and landing, and did not need to learn any evasive actions as they relied on superior speed. All what was needed was sufficient ground training, to learn the instruments, and a couple of glider training sessions.
Given the fact that the Japanese and German air forces were neutralized through a lack of pilots and fuel, these kind of emergency weapons were really the only thing left. The Japanese would have had an amazing anti-ship weapon with the Baika, especially if it was a copy of the Fi 103R. And the Germans had a potent bomber destroyer with the Ba 349. Very unconventional but I believe that they would have proven to be effective, had the war lasted longer.
Kris
