GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
I recently read account of the pilots of the air groups that were emergency scrambled off USS Gambier Bay while she was under attack.
Harrowing is not even close to a good description.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I recently read account of the pilots of the air groups that were emergency scrambled off USS Gambier Bay while she was under attack.FM-2s did yeoman's work providing CAP for the USN fleet auxiliaries and invasion transports. At Leyte Gulf they were presssed into service attacking the Japanese surface forces threatening the invasion fleet off Samar. I can't imagine what it was like, trying to launch off a jeep carrier while under direct fire from enemy battleships.
Probably hairy.FM-2s did yeoman's work providing CAP for the USN fleet auxiliaries and invasion transports. At Leyte Gulf they were presssed into service attacking the Japanese surface forces threatening the invasion fleet off Samar. I can't imagine what it was like, trying to launch off a jeep carrier while under direct fire from enemy battleships.
The F6F made it's combat debut in September 1943. It was in the fight for sure from that time forward.Did I mention the FM-2?
I'd say the F4F was bloody important though just because it took a while before F6F and a sufficient number of F4U were available. The FM-2 was the replacement for the F4F-4 that came a year late (except it would still need a two stage engine).
We did fight the Japanese Army Air Force, it was just done by the Army flying P-40s (and in the very end of the war, P-51s)
By 1944 when the F6F was racking up a ton of victories, Japan was already flagging somewhat in production and a lot in trained pilots. I think they were also outnumbered pretty badly by then.
I'm not sure that's entirely fair to the FM-2. It wasn't there for the big fights in the first place, it was there to keep convoys from being free lunch to air attacks. It was the WWII equivalent of the Hawker Harrier: you never want to have it be your first choice for air to air engagements, but it's FAR better than having no options.Had the FM-2 not flown at all, almost nobody would have missed it. It took part in no major actions. Yes, it did good work but, no, that work wasn't exactly vital. You can't say the same for the Hellcat and Corsair, which were in the thick of things when it counted. These two planes made the A6M'Ki-61/Ki84/Ki-100 models obsolete all on their own, and they did it quite decisively, with top-notch kill ratios that were mostly won in the low-to-middle altitudes where Naval Fleet Defense and Attack fighters lived. Had there been a land bridge, we might have fought more IJA aircraft, but Japan is surrounded by Ocean, so most of the fighting was IJN and a forced landing was always a loss, many times of both plane (for sure) and pilot (mostly).
A-36 and P-51A arrived Fall 1943 in CBI to 23rd, 51st and 311FG plus Air Cmdo. The P-51B/C began combat ops in April 1944.We did fight the Japanese Army Air Force, it was just done by the Army flying P-40s (and in the very end of the war, P-51s)
By 1944 when the F6F was racking up a ton of victories, Japan was already flagging somewhat in production and a lot in trained pilots. I think they were also outnumbered pretty badly by then.
I can't really say much in response to this. At this point, there's little point for any further discussion. I, however, might still start another topic in the What-If section on Japanese prototypes and aircraft development that would be related to this thread's topic to some degree.A lot of the things you are suggesting just aren't real or accurate. I, and others, are trying to answer politely but it's getting kind of silly.
I will concede on this point, at the very least, though by doing so, I must comment that, following this line of thought, most of the discussion surrounding this topic on the internet would be considered "very mid 20th Century". My opinion on Japan's strength on the world stage is arguable, but I largely remain unmoved on that point.Finally .... forget about "kill ratios". That is very mid 20th Century, and are based on claims without really comparing losses.
By the same token, Italy relied on Germany for better engines and still managed to come up with a better aircraft at the timewhile the Japanese generally relied on German designs throughout the war
Several of the Soviet's engines were based on foreign designs like the Klimov M-100, which was a licenced Hispano-Suiza 12Y. The M-103/M-105 was a further development of the M-100....such as the notion that Russian engine development was behind Japanese efforts, when, for instance, there existed indigenous (if further developments of foreign designs, like early Japanese radials were to some degree) in-line liquid-cooled engines, while the Japanese generally relied on German designs throughout the war, as such engines were apparently quite complex for the Japanese to develop or to maintain (the Ki-12, Ki-64 and Ki-61-ii were victims of this, particularly the former two).
FM-2s did yeoman's work providing CAP for the USN fleet auxiliaries and invasion transports. At Leyte Gulf they were presssed into service attacking the Japanese surface forces threatening the invasion fleet off Samar. I can't imagine what it was like, trying to launch off a jeep carrier while under direct fire from enemy battleships.
DId not say the FM was a bad airplane or that it didn't do its job.I'm not sure that's entirely fair to the FM-2. It wasn't there for the big fights in the first place, it was there to keep convoys from being free lunch to air attacks. It was the WWII equivalent of the Hawker Harrier: you never want to have it be your first choice for air to air engagements, but it's FAR better than having no options.
I can't really say much in response to this. At this point, there's little point for any further discussion. I, however, might still start another topic in the What-If section on Japanese prototypes and aircraft development that would be related to this thread's topic to some degree.
I already have knowledge of certain details of your general summary, such as the Thach Weave, the presence of Soviet Pilots in the Air War over China, or the troubled development cycle of the wartime Japanese aviation industry. Other points also seem to be exaggerated to some degree, take for example the "annihilation" of Allied air power by IJN air power in the early war; in the Philippines and Malaya at the very least, many Allied aircraft were destroyed on the ground, and Japanese air forces had the numbers and the element of surprise to overwhelm their Allied enemies.
Hawaii especially is untrue, with the P-40s that managed to reach the air performing quite well given the disadvantages that befell them.
I've also heard fairly critical opinions on the pilot quality of the European colonies, which were of lower priority compared to their mother countries and closer colonies.
Some points of yours also seem somewhat suspect, such as the notion that Russian engine development was behind Japanese efforts, when, for instance, there existed indigenous (if further developments of foreign designs, like early Japanese radials were to some degree) in-line liquid-cooled engines,
while the Japanese generally relied on German designs throughout the war, as such engines were apparently quite complex for the Japanese to develop or to maintain (the Ki-12, Ki-64 and Ki-61-ii were victims of this, particularly the former two).
There's also your past reliance on figures in the wartime TAIC report on Japanese aircraft, mostly calculations that have been disputed repeatedly in the past. I won't go much further than this, however.
I will concede on this point, at the very least, though by doing so, I must comment that, following this line of thought, most of the discussion surrounding this topic on the internet would be considered "very mid 20th Century". My opinion on Japan's strength on the world stage is arguable, but I largely remain unmoved on that point.
The most humorous claim I've seen in the entirety of this thread is that the Zero is "underrated", when it is, dare I say it, the most over-represented Japanese aircraft of all time, inclusive of both fictional and non-fictional aircraft.
I can't really say much in response to this.
Even in Europe it was more than holding its own against Luftwaffe fighters over Norway in 1945. I can't comment upon the quality of the Luftwaffe pilots there but the Royal Navy pilots were well trained and it was the seventh year of the war for the Fleet Air Arm.I'm not sure that's entirely fair to the FM-2. It wasn't there for the big fights in the first place, it was there to keep convoys from being free lunch to air attacks. It was the WWII equivalent of the Hawker Harrier: you never want to have it be your first choice for air to air engagements, but it's FAR better than having no options.
Good call on the Italian engine ... issues.By the same token, Italy relied on Germany for better engines and still managed to come up with a better aircraft at the time
- Fiat G.55.
Performance wise the G55 and MC 205 were marginally better than the 109. Not as good as the FW190Good call on the Italian engine ... issues.
BTW - was really the gorgeous G.55 a better fighter than German types?
Good call on the Italian engine ... issues.
BTW - was really the gorgeous G.55 a better fighter than German types?
Performance wise the G55 and MC 205 were marginally better than the 109. Not as good as the FW190
I think the Germans themselves were quite interested in both the G55 and the Re 2005 as having the potential to be better than anything they had. Speed wasn't quite as high as the fastest 109 and 190 variants, but that could have been remedied.