Ki-84 - uber aircraft?

[attack!!!]

I think the best Japanese fighter aircraft is the Kawanishi N1K-J Shiden Kai:

In air-to-air combat, experienced Japanese pilots flying Shiden Kais could more than hold their own against most American pilots flying F6F Hellcats. In February 1945, a brave pilot, Warrant Officer Muto, single-handedly engaged 12 Hellcats and shot down four of them before the remainder disengaged

Is this story true?

 

[renrich]

If you are referring to the Shinden, a canard AC, my source says that it had a total flying time of 45 minutes before the war ended so I doubt if it had any kills.

 

[Sgt. Pappy]

He's referring to the Kawanishi N1K2-J Shiden Kai "George".
Kawanishi N1K1-J Shiden (Violet Lightning) and N1K2-J Shiden Kai

It's a conventional monoplane .. not like the Shinden.

 

[merlin]

No attack!! is not refering to the Shinden, the reference 'Shiden' is correct the Allied code name being 'George'.
As soon as the prototype of the floatplane fighter 15-shi Kyofu (Mighty Wind) flew, work began on a land-based version. The first version had almost mid-fuselage set wings - which meant low undercarriage.
This to quote Green:
.... entered service with the J.N.A.F. early in 1944, and despite troubles with its Homare engine and shortcomings resulting from the inadequate development period, it soon proved itself a redoutable warplane, and its pilots came to lool upon the formidable Gruman Hellcat as a relatively easy 'kill'.
The second version the Kawanishi N1K2-J Shiden-Kai (George 21) was a simplified aircraft - only 43,000 parts compared with 66,000 on the first, it was now a low-set wing yielding a less complicated undercarriage.
It was this machine that Flight Warrant Officer Kinsuke Muto is quoted by Green as having his 'success' - what a competent pilot can do.

 

[JoeB]

'a brave pilot, Warrant Officer Muto, single-handedly engaged 12 Hellcats and shot down four of them before the remainder disengaged'
Is this story true?

No, and it's not even a claim actually made by Muto. It was invented in a war time Japanese press release, then repeated by writers like Green and Francillon and ever since.

Again see my earlier post mentioning "Genda's Blade" about the 343rd Air Group. The author, Henry Sakaida, estimated from correlating their and US accounts of their various combats that this elite Shiden ('George') unit's actual exchange ratio v US fighters (it met USAAF, USN and USMC) was around 1:3, ie. in the US favor; although it did have some successful combats. I recommend that book, and as I mentioned regret there isn't so far anything similar dealing comprehensively with a Type 4 ('Frank') unit's actual results, even in Japanese AFAIK.

Like the Type 4, the Shiden* was inherently a good plane, but its combat record in the actual cirsumstances, as far as can be verified from two sided accounting, was not all that impressive.

*紫電 shiden=violet [colored] lightning v 震電 shinden=tremor causing lightning (or 'magnificent' lightning as often rendered).

Joe

 

[renrich]

I strongly question that any Japanese pilot ever looked on a Hellcat as an easy kill. At least Saburo Sakai did not indicate that although he did score some kills against that AC, although I don't believe it was in a George. My source shows the George as having performance about like an F6F3 but not up to the Level of the F6F5.

 

[JoeB]

This to quote Green:
.... it soon proved itself a redoutable warplane, and its pilots came to lool upon the formidable Gruman Hellcat as a relatively easy 'kill'.

I didn't notice the quotation of that classic chestnut before. There's simply no evidence to support that statement, AFAIK no evidence Green even thought he had any particular evidence . Let me ask again more directly, why exactly *are* we quoting Green at this stage of the game?

Joe

 

[Graeme]

Once upon a time I would assume the kind of general characterizations in those books were backed up with a lot of well documented examples of particular combats, but now I realize that's a doubtful assumption.

You discussed a number of authors in another thread Joe and now Francillion joins the list?

It compared favourably with the best of its antagonists; it was slightly slower than the P-51H Mustang and the P-47N Thunderbolt, but it could out-climb and out-manoeovre both American fighters.

This is also mentioned in Francillion's biblical "Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War" of 1970. He mentions the Ki-84 reaching;

"427mph at 20,000 ft using War Emergency Power. This speed exceeded that of the American P-51D-25-NA Mustang and Republic P-47D-35-RA Thunderbolt at the same altitude by 3 mph and 22 mph respectively."

Joe has mentioned that Francillion provides no evidence where this comparison data came from.

Interestingly he wrote an article for the part-work series Airplane in 1990 and makes no mention of the above comparison, simply concluding that a Ki-84 was;

.."extensively tested in the Philippines and the United States, this evaluation confirming the high opinion in which the Hayate was held by allied crews."

 

[JoeB]

You discussed a number of authors in another thread Joe and now Francillion joins the list?

...Francillion's biblical "Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War" of 1970. He mentions the Ki-84 reaching;

Yes, "Japanese a/c..." is an important book but you can't rely on it entirely, not for those sort of unfootnoted characterizations, and also not for the order of battle info (which units operated which planes at the end of each section), or necessarily the production histories, etc. Though there isn't any one English language book that covers the whole topic better that I know of.

Francillon way back also wrote stuff on the Pacific War apparently using popularized Japanese publications as source. I remember one article, though can't remember the exact citation, reciting vastly inflated Japanese aerial claims at Coral Sea as if facts. Now as we all know, older Western work usually did the inverse, some lower quality stuff still does, repeating Allied claims clearly not verified as losses in long known and credible Japanese sources. But it's something to keep in mind, that Francillon's original approach to this topic seems to have been via popularized Japanese accounts and that's where some of those statements probably come from. Anyway again, with 'Hellcat easy kill', whether it's from Green or Francillon, and while it may have appeared first in some Japanese article or book, it's highly questionable whether that was actually the view of Japanese air units, and it clearly can't be supported with two sided facts of F6F v Shiden combats; likewise the 1 George v 12 F6F's comes out 4:1 in favor of George, was a Japanese wartime press claim, not an actual JNAF claim, besides not being true.

Joe

 

[Sgt. Pappy]

What is really needed is hardcore test data... the aircraft's condition, loading etc. Hard to find especially on Japanese planes.

 

[attack!!!]

And now is Saburo Sakai, alone in a Zero, against possibly twenty Hellcats:
Sakai

I can say that it was difficult. Only twice had I ever been caught unawares by my enemy, and the second time was on 24 June 1944 when we flew from Iwo Jima to intercept an inbound force of American planes. This was also when I first met the new Grumman F6F Hellcat, a very formidable fighter. I shot one down, but I was lucky because I never saw the enemy flight approach on my blind side. My peripheral vision was gone. This was when I took off the straps of my parachute harness so I could turn my head around and see things more. As soon as I did this I saw perhaps six Hellcats on my tail, and I began all of my tricks to throw them off. I was lucky, because I don't think they had much experience against an experienced fighter pilot. I reduced power, they overshot and I increased throttle and turned right inside them. I was on their tail and I shot down another one, but then there were more on me! I pulled away, rolled over into a dive to get away. Then later I pulled out, but found myself surrounded by fifteen Hellcats, and this was amazing, because these aircraft matched me turn and spiral at every maneuver. No other enemy aircraft I had ever fought could do this, and I learned at that time my old tricks were of no use; this plane could perhaps not turn inside the Zero, but it could pull every other maneuver, and it was faster than our 350 miles per hour and could take much more damage and still fly. What saved me was the fact that these pilots were very new. Had they been the veterans of before I would have been dead many times over. I was in this fight for almost half an hour, me alone against possibly twenty enemy planes, of which I had shot down two and damaged another, but they would not let me go. I must have been something of a novelty to them, given the fact that they had been used to killing inexperienced teenagers. Now it seemed that these were also the same caliber of pilots firing at me from incredible distances. They never had a chance of hitting me. It seemed that they just wanted to keep me in the area, and the law of averages would allow them to win

Who can believe this?.

If Sakai could do such impossible thing with a Zero, why Muto with a Shiden Kai couldn't?
(sorry, my English's terrible)

 

[Nikademus]

likewise the 1 George v 12 F6F's comes out 4:1 in favor of George, was a Japanese wartime press claim, not an actual JNAF claim, besides not being true.

Joe

What was the actual result then? I've read this version of the battle. While such a feat would be an "exception" vs. the norm, it's not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[JoeB]

What was the actual result then? I've read this version of the battle. While such a feat would be an "exception" vs. the norm, it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Again, the key flaw in that story is it's based on a wartime press account, not the JNAF's account. In the press account Muto (then with the Yokosuka Air Group Fighter Sdn) took on 12 F6F's singlehanded, thus creating a much needed new hero. In the real combat, February 16, 1945, it was 10 Shiden from his unit, and Muto himself never claimed otherwise, that probably believed they took on 12 F6F's. The actual opponents were 7 F6F's from VF-82. See Sakaida "Pacific Air Combat WWII-Voices from the Past". VF-82 did in fact lose 4 a/c but many more were claimed. There may have Shiden losses that's not clear AFAIK. So it's not 'couldn't' it's just 'didn't', and didn't actually claim to.

The point about war time press accounts is somewhat generally important too I think as it bears on the occasional debate of "but can we trust 'their' accounts?" , whoever 'they' happen to be in a given case. A less dramatic example is books which use USAAF war time releases about daily activity to calculate losses. Those releases did sometimes omit as combat losses eg. combat damaged planes which didn't make it all the way back; whereas the true total losses can be seen in the records. So I've heard from people I consider reliable, but I've seen it myself wrt to USAF press releases v records in the Korean War. For example the first US jet lost in air combat, an F-80C July 19 1950 to NK Yak-9P's. Books based on press releases have long failed to mention that loss, just mentioning the 3 Yak's claimed (2 failed to return per captured NK accounts), resulting in 'a-ha!!!' 's from people who've found first hand accounts suggesting the loss, and who sometimes would like to believe there were lots more US air combat losses in that war than officially 'admitted'. But that F-80 loss and its cause is quite clear in the records themselves, and included in immediate postwar official totals.

Joe

 

[JoeB]

delete double post

 

[attack!!!]

Again, the key flaw in that story is it's based on a wartime press account, not the JNAF's account. In the press account Muto (then with the Yokosuka Air Group Fighter Sdn) took on 12 F6F's singlehanded, thus creating a much needed new hero. In the real combat, February 16, 1945, it was 10 Shiden from his unit, and Muto himself never claimed otherwise, that probably believed they took on 12 F6F's. The actual opponents were 7 F6F's from VF-82. See Sakaida "Pacific Air Combat WWII-Voices from the Past". VF-82 did in fact lose 4 a/c but many more were claimed. There may have Shiden losses that's not clear AFAIK. So it's not 'couldn't' it's just 'didn't', and didn't actually claim to.
...

Uhm, i guess you are right

 

[Nikademus]

Again, the key flaw in that story is it's based on a wartime press account, not the JNAF's account. In the press account Muto (then with the Yokosuka Air Group Fighter Sdn) took on 12 F6F's singlehanded, thus creating a much needed new hero. In the real combat, February 16, 1945, it was 10 Shiden from his unit, and Muto himself never claimed otherwise, that probably believed they took on 12 F6F's. The actual opponents were 7 F6F's from VF-82. See Sakaida "Pacific Air Combat WWII-Voices from the Past". VF-82 did in fact lose 4 a/c but many more were claimed. There may have Shiden losses that's not clear AFAIK. So it's not 'couldn't' it's just 'didn't', and didn't actually claim to.

Ok, so what you meant when you said "didn't happen" was the part stating that only 1 Shiden took on (or was taken on) by 12 F6F's, not that Muto didn't/coudn't have downed 4 Hellcats during the fight.

Interesting. I hadn't heard it was based on a "press account" though I was aware the story has always been disputed to a degree. I can believe the story could have been distorted however....since one of the books in my lib. describes Muto doing this same thing in Feb of 45 only the date was the 26, he was flying an old Zero, and the 12 enemy planes were Corsairs. Only the end result was the same. 4 claims.

 

[JoeB]

Ok, so what you meant when you said "didn't happen" was the part stating that only 1 Shiden took on (or was taken on) by 12 F6F's, not that Muto didn't/coudn't have downed 4 Hellcats during the fight.

Maybe we're destined to quibble over small points . To me the fame of the story come froms 12:1 yields 4:0, so I would simply say it didn't happen. Since first none of those stats is accurate, and moreover the Japanese air unit itself didn't claim that version, somebody made up important aspects, not the usual situation of conflict between good faith perceptions/recollections on opposing sides.

And the likelihood of all 4 F6F's being due to one pilot in a sizeable fight with many other claims (the combat described in Hata/Izawa may be the same one, claims exceeding the number of F6F's present) would seem minimal. Whereas the possiblity than any given pilot *could* score 4 victories in a mission would seem taken for granted, as already stated. Per official USN list VF-82 was awarded 6 victories in that combat, almost surely an overstatement, but 4:0 was probably not the total score either (Sakaida doesn't say). The source for the press account being at odds with Muto's own description of the action included Muto's wife, so I don't any reason to doubt the basic conclusion of fictionalized press account (Muto himself was killed in a combat with Yorktown F6F's and F4U's July 24 '45).

One correction, if one really wants to stretch to say the story 'happened' it might help , is most of the Yokosuka a/c were Raiden (J2M 'Jack') and Zeroes; Muto's might have been the single Shiden, in the formation.

Joe

 

[Nikademus]

Maybe we're destined to quibble over small points . To me the fame of the story come froms 12:1 yields 4:0, so I would simply say it didn't happen. Since first none of those stats is accurate, and moreover the Japanese air unit itself didn't claim that version, somebody made up important aspects, not the usual situation of conflict between good faith perceptions/recollections on opposing sides.

lol....perhaps we are. . I really was only trying to clarify what you said "didn't happen"....thats all as well as get a more definitive nose count of what happened. I thought I had a track on it but now it looks like my original interpretation was correct after all. So you are in fact saying it, [the losses] didn't happen at all.

And the likelihood of all 4 F6F's being due to one pilot in a sizeable fight with many other claims (the combat described in Hata/Izawa may be the same one, claims exceeding the number of F6F's present) would seem minimal.

Possibly. I will agree that it's unlikely in most any scenario. I'd never use such as general example of prowess either by machine or man. However that said, I've read several verified accounts of such a result (4 to 4+ by one pilot with no return loss) happening in other skirmishes so IMO one simply can't dismiss Muto comprehensively based on what's been presented so far.

Whereas the possiblity than any given pilot *could* score 4 victories in a mission would seem taken for granted, as already stated. Per official USN list VF-82 was awarded 6 victories in that combat, almost surely an overstatement, but 4:0 was probably not the total score either (Sakaida doesn't say).

Unfortunately "official" victory lists are usually wrong, though sometimes they can be spot on. They can also be completely wrong. I've lost track of the # of air battles described where one or both sides were convinced they shot down enemy planes and in fact got none as it turned out in postwar research.

But we could go down this road till the end of time. I guess the point i'm making is that you made a couple of very concrete sounding statements about the combat being more or less completely falsified so i was interested in seeing what the "real" results were. Since there are no hard numbers as it turns out, my gut feeling is that there's too much assumption going on for any definitive claim of completely false to be made. I would be interested in reading what Sakaida wrote about this combat (or seeing it posted) . I've not yet found any other source so far that confirms it to be a simple distorted press account. So i'll fall back on the more generalized conclusions i've made from past research.....Yes, 4 kills in one skirmish or closely related set of skirmishes by one pilot would be extraordinarie....but not impossible(i.e. Muto could have done it, esp given the armament of his mount), a 4:0 exchange is also not ordinary based on average results in multiple theaters when the opponents fall within certain parameters (pilot + machine)....but again, not impossible. The USN was churning out tons of well trained but green pilots well suited to the docile and forgiving nature of the F6F (which helped the loss ratio immensly) Given the nature of the fighting in 44-45, many of them might have gotten used to easy opposition such as when Sakai was pounced on and a suprise given. Suddenly facing an experten or group of experten in more formidable machines is certainly formulae for an isolated tactical upset. If in fact there was more than one Shiden present in this fight, the possibility of the result increases still further. Lastly, no....there's rarely such a thing as an easy kill when the opposition/technology level is within a certain tolerance (and that covers a wide swath of WWII aircraft). Most modern or semi-modern warplanes can put up a good fight if flown well....so saying a "hellcat is an easy kill" isn't worth alot.

So after all this blah blah, what i'm saying in short is, i'm not considering this battle an indciation of the complete domination of Shidens over Hellcats. Rather, the Shiden, with good pilots would have made things for the Hellcats and others a far tougher fight as the former aircraft had some strengths to pit against Hellcat weaknesses far better than the outdated aircraft more often being faced.

 

[Soren]

Sorry about my outburst btw Nika, forgot to say that in my last post.

Apparently the true AVG didn't meet any Zero's.

 

[JoeB]

lol....perhaps we are. .
1. So you are in fact saying it, [the losses] didn't happen at all.

2. Unfortunately "official" victory lists are usually wrong, though sometimes they can be spot on. They can also be completely wrong.

3. I would be interested in reading what Sakaida wrote about this combat (or seeing it posted) . I've not yet found any other source so far that confirms it to be a simple distorted press account. So i'll fall back on the more generalized conclusions i've made from past research.....

1. How could I be saying there weren't USN losses when I'm the only one quoting a source matching specific USN losses (4 of VF-82) to that combat?

2. As I already said, right in the quote. But 6 victories credited and none scored would be rare for USN claims at that stage of the war, see below.

3. In a recent exchange you said you shouldn't have to post excerpts from "Fighters Over Tunisia" by Shores re: USN Casablanca combats. As it happened, I didn't ask you to: I named 4 other sources, one by the semi-official French author Jacques Mordal and two English ones directly quoting French records and detailed USN ones. But let's say the discussion really had hinged on your interpretation of Shores: I would still have agreed with you that if I want to challenge your interpretation of a book you cite, I have to obtain it. The burden is not on you to scan and post from it (as mentioned I do plan to buy Shores' forthcoming rewrite, a project announced in an email from Shores posted on 12 O'Clock High forum).

But as far as the published source here Muto's wife told Sakaida that Muto said his achievement had been fictionalized by the official press. I see no validity in 'falling back' on other sources that just researched it less.

But, for alternative instantly accessible source I found this post on a Japanese forum. From the format, I'd say it's from the "Maru Special Pacific Air Sea War Series" which I've seen reproduced and credited elsewhere on web, though I can't gtee that's where it comes from:
FlasH BBS Pro v1.41 [‹c˜_ƒ{[ƒh‰ß‹ŽƒƒO]
Post number 2517
Summarizing: 2/16/1945 Yokosuka AG; 10 Zeroes 2 Shiden-kai; mission commander Capt Tsukamoto; details of the other pilots , 2nd Lt Hagiri and Muto being the Shiden pilots; Hagiri claims F6F and the others 5 (more? but no specific Muto claims), 1 fails to return, 2 hit (substantial uncertainty IMO/IME about what those references mean, wrecked, just damaged? etc).

And a site about Muto saying 12:1 was a 'myth' by the press
•"¡‹à‹`@*ˆÑ

So the mythical nature of one on many is not all hanging on Henry Sakaida.

Much of the rest is IMO obvious and already said by both you and me: a Shiden pilot *might* down 4 F6F's. But the famous story in Green etc is not "a Shiden might down 4 F6F's", it's a "Shiden took on 12 F6F's singlehanded and downed 4" : didn't happen.

As for Shiden doing better than Zero in 1945 combats, stands to reason but to what degree, can you provide this info? It's one issue being debated on that forum page I quoted, actually. USN claim/loss stats by type actually say otherwise, though those stats were plagued with mis-id's of the enemy as already mentioned. And again Sakaida quoted 1:3 ratio for the Shiden-kai equipped 343rd AG (in "Genda's Blade"), and that unit had a concentration of notable pilots of the 1945 JNAF, not just a better plane.

Joe