The real combat history of the Ki-43

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

For those suffering from severe impatience who can't stand to see me finish posting the data from this book, I recommend going to this very illuminating and often unintentionally hilarious thread, which I will be revisiting soon after I finish this particular effort, which though insufficiently appreciated by some sufferers of memory lapses and severe ideological bias, does require some work.

Was the Sea Hurricane a superior naval fighter than the F4F?

I would say no. Wildcat had greatly superior range and loiter time. Most of the Wildcats had folding wings. Their engines were less vulnerable because air cooled. They had a much greater ammunition capacity than most of the Hurricanes. Wildcat was also just a better fighter. Sea Hurricane...
ww2aircraft.net
 
Nah. I've been goofing off all day and I'm literally standing here coated up to get out. It's windy, overcast, damp and humid and I'd rather stay inside. I was going to mention it in the weather section but.. you know.
 
Next up is the "Green Hell" of New Guinea. Which is interesting since that epithet is in competition with Burma, not exactly gentle temperate fields of green there either... but apparently New Guinea was much worse.
 
Likewise how harder would it have been for the Zero and Ki-43 pilots if they faced the MkIII Spitfire in 1940?, likewise the FW190A in '41?, I think their life would have been harder don't you agree?.
 
I mean, if you are going to open up a debate into planes that didn't even make production, it could definitely get weird... it's clear to me that many of the myths about the Ki-43, including quite a few which are popular around here, are complete horseshit. As are many tropes about the CBI Theater, about the Hurricane, and about multiple other aircraft types. But I'll get more into that when I finish going through the book.
 
Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
I mean, if you are going to open up a debate into planes that didn't even make production
Click to expand...
Which of those two didn't make production?, the MkIII Spitfire had production delayed simply because the war started, it was produced as the MkVIII and later the MkXIV, both were in front line service until the end of the war, likewise the FW190A was in full production throughout the war.
 

The Mk III never entered production. The Mk VIII was A DIFFERENT aircraft with a different engine, and that wasn't the only change. It carried some elements of the Spitfire III design, but it was not the same plane.

The Fw 190 was fast and heavily armed, but not a good turner. Not unlike the P-51A in that sense, which did not fare well against the Ki-43.
 
Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
The Mk III never entered production. The Mk VIII was A DIFFERENT aircraft with a different engine, and that wasn't the only change. It carried some elements of the Spitfire III design, but it was not the same plane.
Click to expand...
Never went into production because war broke out, the MkVIII and MkXIV have direct links to the MkIII the same as the MkII became the MkV, the MkV became the MkIX, still if the IJN can have more Ki-43's in 1940-41 the Allies can have the MkIII. As for the FW190A it had a roll rate equal too or better than any aircraft it met, an absolute beast up to 20,000ft.
 
I must admit, i don't understand what the Spitfire Mk III or FW-190 have to do with the topic at hand. And what's so special with the Mk III anyway, the thing is a slightly better Mk V, and as we've seen the Mk V was more or less humiliated by Ki-43s or Zeros.
 
mack8 said:
and as we've seen the Mk V was more or less humiliated by Ki-43s or Zeros.
Click to expand...

Not really. 15 Jan 1944; Spitfire VCs vs Ki-43s

This series of engagements illustrates well the hazards of claiming when fighters meet their opposite numbers over a jungle and mountain terrain. The RAF Spitfire pilots had claimed a total of 16 destroyed, six probables and 17 damaged against three sweeps totalling 24 Ki 43s, but had actually succeeded in shooting down five. The Japanese pilots (from the most accurate claiming JAAF unit on the Burma front) claimed eight Spitfires, actually shooting down two. There may have been a further success included in these numbers however, for 6 IAF Squadron reported that Flg Off Bhullar's Hurricane was damaged in combat, and he force-landed; he may have stumbled into the engagement when on a tactical reconnaissance sortie. Nonetheless, the day's casualties were the heaviest ever to be suffered by the 64th Sentai in a single day, and three of the dead pilots had been experienced, skillful members of the unit. Deeply shaken by this experience, the sentai withdrew from Meiktila to Mingaladon. It was not the only JAAF loss on 15 January however, for 2/Lt Yutaka Nichimine of the 21st Sentai was also killed in an accident in his Ki 45. 'Bloody Shambles V3'.

The VCs were able to bounce the 64th Sentai with predictable results. There were certainly occasions when Spitfire VCs and VIIIs were bounced but my impression in reading Bloody Shambles V3 is that the Spitfire VC held it's own against the Ki-43.
 
The Mk III is a unicorn.
 
I would say from reading through this history, the Spit V did reasonably well against the Ki-43-II, about even. The climb rate was an advantage, compared to other Allied fighters they faced. The main limitation that the Japanese mentioned was the range. They knew they could keep engaging for 10 or 15 minutes and the Spits would have to go back to base. The Spit VIII did better than even. It had such a speed advantage plus the climb rate, and the range was better. Once it got there, which took a while, the Spit VIII was the second most feared enemy fighter for the JAAF in Burma, after the P-51B / C and D.

It seems like once Spitfires started coming in, the RAF converted to Spit VIII fairly rapidly, with the Spit Vs being kept back in India for the most part.
 
What is interesting is that in China and Burma, some other types didn't do very well, including the P-51A, P-38, and P-47.

The Ki-43 did not have as many problems as you might expect catching pretty fast planes including the P-43, P-51A, P-38 / F-4, Mosquito, P-47, and sometimes Spit VIII and P-51B/C.

The only early available fighter that seemed to pose a challenge to the Ki-43 was the P-40. It did probably a little bit better than the Spit V did, and had better range so it could be used further out, and was available back to 1941. The Mohawk did better than I would have expected as well, going about even. There are some differences in New Guinea as we shall see. P-38s did a lot better in that Theater.

It's also clear that Ki-43s could shoot down US heavy bombers, notably the B-24, though the B-29, which arrived pretty late to the Theater, was a real challenge. They were also able to catch recon Mosquitos and P-38s several times. The Ki-43 proved able to do interceptions at night, shooting down several B-24s and Wellingtons at night (with the help of searchlights).

From reading this book, the Ki-43 showed two traits that I think are remarkable:

1) It had the knack to evade being hit and destroyed, so long as the pilot was aware of the enemy, and in many fairly large engagements had fairly low losses. 20-50 planes on each side and only one or two losses. The same was clearly true for the P-40, Spitfire, and Merlin-engined P-51s on the Allied side. Most of the rest of the Allied planes did not seem to have this knack, at least in the CBI Theater, and often took significant losses in big engagements with Ki-43s. The Hurricane, the Buffalo, and the P-66 had the worst records, and were not suitable for combat with any version of the Ki-43.

2) It had a knack to press home attacks and kill enemy aircraft, of any kind, albeit with some risk. The Ki-43, for all it's supposedly inferior armament, was a deadly fighter.

It's also impressive how effectively they were deployed, with good strategy and tactics etc., considering they were often flying Vic formations rather than finger-four, and in many cases either didn't have radios or had inferior radios that didn't work too well. The aircraft was clearly not as fragile as it's reputation suggests, and they were frequently able to fly home with heavy battle damage and save their pilots.

On the negative side, overclaiming was an issue which clearly did cause some confusion to their higher command, over-aggression was an issue which cost the lives of many JAAF pilots. Many of their Sentai leaders were personally too aggressive and they died at an alarming rate. Ramming attacks etc. should have been banned.

I was also struck by the Ki-44 not being as much as a factor as I'd been led to expect. Partly this was due to it's shorter range. The Japanese considered it an interceptor. I have another book which gets into the history of the other JAAF a bit more and may post some data on that a bit later. Ki-44 was not really any more of a threat to P-40s or Spitfires than the Ki-43 was. The Ki-84 was also more limited than i would have expected, though it did have the speed.
 
Do you really need to spam your fan fiction into this thread when we specifically re-opened the second thread to re-engage in the pointless debate about the Hurricane stats?
 
Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
It seems like once Spitfires started coming in, the RAF converted to Spit VIII fairly rapidly, with the Spit Vs being kept back in India for the most part.
Click to expand...
Geography lesson time again I fear! Without understanding the geography and the ebb and flow of the ground war, you will find it very difficult to understand the reasoning behind the air war. It is more akin to the tactical support operations in Europe than stand alone heavy bomber campaigns of the 8th & 15th AF.



Kolkata = Calcutta (major port supplying the Allied armies & air forces in Eastern India and the Hump)
Chattogram = Chittagong (the forward supply port for the Arakan campaigns)
Myanmar = Burma
Bangladesh was part of India until Partition in 1947 when it became East Pakistan and, after another war in 1971, a separate state named Bangladesh.

No. It wasn't a case of the Spitfire Vc squadrons "being kept back in India", as you put it, because all the fighting was on the India / Burma border areas with the forward most bases still being on the Indian side. There were 2 main campaigning areas at this time.
1. the southernmost part of India south of Chittagong (what is now Bangladesh) down the Arakan coast into Burma.
2. the area in Mauripur to the north where the Japanese invaded India seeking to disrupt Allied logistics at the main railhead at Dimapur (which meant taking places like Imphal & Kohima).
The Allies were able to switch there air forces from one front to the other as needs required.


Late 1943 saw the 3 Spitfire Vc squadrons redeployed from the defence of the Calcutta area to more forward locations in the Chittagong area, ahead of the Allied planned Second Arakan Campaign that kicked off in early Jan 1944. And why not. Japanese air activity in the Calcutta area had been limited in the preceeding months to recce flights. There was a greater need for higher performance fighters to protect the planned ground campaign from Japanese air intervention. Plans were already in hand to move the 2 Spitfire Mk. VIII squadrons from the Med (81 & 152 were withdrawn from the Italian front at the beginning of Nov) and more Spitfire VIII were en route to India by sea to allow more squadrons to convert (155 got Spitfire VIII when it was withdrawn from Imphal to Alipore in Jan 1944). Then on 5 Dec 1943, after the 3 Spitfire Vc units had been moved forward, the Japanese launched a new bombing assault on the Calcutta area under the codename "Ry Ichi-go".

Then with the Japanese invasion in the northern Imphal / Kohima area in March they were moved there, again to an area of greater need as the Japanese bombing campaign on Calcutta fizzled out.

As I pointed out previously only 3 squadrons used the Mk.Vc in India / Burma. Their basing was as follows.

607
Received Vc while at Alipore (Calcutta) in Sept 1943
1 Oct moved to Amarda Road (SW of Calcutta)
15 Oct Alipore
29 Nov Ramu (inland from Cox's Bazaar south of Chittagong but still in India as it then was)
25 Feb Nidania (another base in the same area but on the coast)
21 March Rumkhapalong (just north of Cox's Bazaar)
17 April Wangjing in the Imphal area.

It converted to the Spitfire VIII in March 1944. The move to the northern front was a response to the increased threat from the Japanese invasion of India in the Imphal / Kohima region.

615
6 May 1943 Alipore where it converted from Hurricanes to Spitfire Vc in Oct.
1 Nov Chittagong
13 Dec Dohazari (SE of Chittagong)
25 Feb 1944 Nazir
19 March Silchar West (west of Imphal)
5 May Dergaon (north of Kohima)
23 May Palel (south of Imphal)
10 Aug Baigachi (NW of Calcutta i.e. withdrawn from the front to rest)

Conversion to Spitfire VIII took place between June & Aug 1944

136
21 June 1943 Baigachi where it converted from Hurricanes to Spitfire Vc
6 Nov Amarda Road
21 Nov Baigachi
1 Dec Ramu (near Chittagong)
25 Jan 1944 Rumkhapalong (just north of Cox's Bazaar)
5 March Sapam (south of Imphal)
11 March Wangjing (in the Imphal area)
18 April Chittagong

It converted to Spitfire VIII between Jan & March 1944

So no the Spitfire Vc units were not "being kept back". Entirely the opposite. They really couldn't be much further forward at the time.
 

I am not quite as unfamiliar with the geography as you seem to assume, but the fighting involving Spitfires took a few different patterns. I wasn't pulling that comment out of my ass.

As far as I could determine, the Spit VIII was used to escort bombers such as on raids into Burma, and notably, escorting transport aircraft flying 'The Hump', and they got into a couple of large-ish engagements that way. For example on 25 April 1944 64th Sentai Ki-43s attacked C-47s escorted by Spitfires from 81 Sqn RAF. The Troop Carrier Command lost 5 C-47s, 81 Sqn claimed one Ki-43. I assume those were Spitfire Mk VIII, and this seems to be confirmed in your post here

The Spit Vs seem to show up mainly defending their own air bases and nearby towns (i.e. in India), such as during a raid on 21 Feb 1944 when 204th Sentai engaged 136 Sqn Spitfire MK Vs over Kaladan and shot down two (claiming 8) plus 1 No 6 Sqn IAF Hurricane, for no loss. No 136 Sqn did not convert to Mk VIII until the next month so I assume these were Spit Vs.

On a similar raid against on 13 March, a large force of Ki-43s from 204 and 64th Sentais faced just four 81 Sqn RAF Spitfires, shooting down one but losing one to Aussie pilot Flg Off Larry Cronin. This shows a much better result from what I assume to be Spitfire Mk VIII.

It's hard to be certain of types because this author and a couple of other books I have usually don't indicate which type of Spitfire they are talking about, and don't always give the unit. But from the unit numbers I did check, that seemed to be the general pattern.
 
From Bloody Shambles V3:

Monday, 21 February 1944 Next day 20 Squadron aircraft again targeted the crash-landed Ki 21 at Myohang, Flg Off E.P. Hulme setting it on fire. Hurricanes of 134 Squadron, escorting TacR Hurricanes, saw it burning and also strafed it and the airfield. However, 20 Squadron's KX229 'H' was damaged by AA during one sortie on this date, Flt Sgt R.G. Lee crash-landing just within British lines, and returning safely. During 21st 12 Ki 48s of the 8th Sentai were escorted to Sinzeywa by 45 Ki 43s. They were intercepted by Spitfires from 136 and 607 Squadrons south-east of Akyab Island, where Flt Lt Colin Doudy of 607 claimed a Ki 43 probably shot down and two damaged, others claiming five more damaged. The Japanese aircraft all returned safely however. Following the departure of 81 Squadron to Tulihal, 152 Squadron now moved its Spitfire VIIIs from Baigachi to Double Moorings, Chittagong. 27 Squadron had also moved nearer to the front, arriving at Parashuram.

No mention of Spitfire losses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

J
fiatG.55 combat history
Replies
0
Views
664
Jerrybandit67
J
W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Thumpalumpacus
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
692
Ivan1GFP
I
A
The Myth of the British "Fixing" The Corsair
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
11K
EwenS
E
A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
ThomasP
T
Menu
Log in
Register