The real combat history of the Ki-43 (1 Viewer)

[J.A.W.]

What I was referring to regarding the Bf 109F was that it's nose gun was accurate, though I'm not sure how much they even employed those against 8th AF heavies. They mostly faced other fighters and fighter-bombers, and light and medium bombers in North Africa, though toward the end there were some B-17s and B-24s there. I think the Luftwaffe at that time and in that Theater preferred not to engage the bomber strikes too closely, for a variety of reasons.



No doubt, I'm sure Fw 190s were scary as hell. I was just surprised to see that Ki-43s kind of had the number of B-24s, clearly. They even shot down some B-17s and one or two B-29s.



Without a doubt. I'm sure they were typically using other methods to shoot them down, God knows they shot down plenty of them.

As a side note, it's also interesting to see that most of the Hurricane squadrons I looked up had IIb or even IIa types. I wonder if that was due to shortage of IIc (seems unlikely) or some other reason, like maybe they preferred the .303 armed versions in this Theater.

A couple of possibilities (IIRC, I've seen IICs with a pair of Hispanos removed - & the discards used as extemporised flak guns),
1, Weight - if carrying bombs & full of juice on rough strips, - less is better.
2, As noted by A. Peart, the Spit-jockey - the .303" could 'put a lot of lead into them'.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

A couple of possibilities (IIRC, I've seen IICs with a pair of Hispanos removed - & the discards used as extemporised flak guns),
1, Weight - if carrying bombs & full of juice on rough strips, - less is better.
2, As noted by A. Peart, the Spit-jockey - the .303" could 'put a lot of lead into them'.

Plus the .303s could carry a lot more ammo, and had a much longer firing time I think.

Hurricane IIa also had the best performance of the Hurricane II variants, from the data I've seen. Against an Oscar, or most Japanese bombers, I would think 8 x .303 would be plenty of firepower.

 

[PAT303]

I was just surprised to see that Ki-43s kind of had the number of B-24s, clearly. They even shot down some B-17s and one or two B-29s

I remember reading on here that one of the tactics used by the IJN was that all aircraft singled out and attacked one bomber at a time, in that scenario a B17- B24 crew would encounter continued and relentless attacks by fighters who rolled in one after another until fatal damage was scored.

 

[PAT303]

Hurricane IIa also had the best performance of the Hurricane II variants, from the data I've seen. Against an Oscar, or most Japanese bombers, I would think 8 x .303 would be plenty of firepower.

In a Spitfire I'd ditch the cannons and just have .303's loaded with AP and incendiary ammunition facing IJN aircraft.

 

[J.A.W.]

In a Spitfire I'd ditch the cannons and just have .303's loaded with AP and incendiary ammunition facing IJN aircraft.

Please refer back to post #138 (a couple of pages back) since a Spitfire VIII pilot quote can provide corrective criticism.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

The thing was, by the time you get into the later run Ki-43-II, they did have armor. With the Spit you can have two guns and some .303s, which is good. With the Hurri it was either 4 x 20mm cannon or just .303s. In that case I'd go with the latter, especially if it also meant better roll rate and speed.

 

[J.A.W.]

The thing was, by the time you get into the later run Ki-43-II, they did have armor. With the Spit you can have two guns and some .303s, which is good. With the Hurri it was either 4 x 20mm cannon or just .303s. In that case I'd go with the latter, especially if it also meant better roll rate and speed.

What have you gleaned about the Ki 43's armour layout? Part of what the Spitfire VIII pilot was saying referred to the .303" bullets
being visually deflected away from Me 109s at highly oblique angles - which is a function of the dural armour-plates set to do so.

In fact, that was a major reason why 20mm were 'gun of choice' for the RAF, since even .50" were tested as insufficient at those angles.
(& this was confirmed by German pilots under interrogation, they felt they could survive a .50" fighter attack, but feared the Hispano).

 

[tyrodtom]

The Japanese .303's were more powerful, each one was equal to two 20mm Hispano's in regards to effect on target, you can't compare IJN .303's to the Commonwealth models.

Plus the .303s could carry a lot more ammo, and had a much longer firing time I think.

Hurricane IIa also had the best performance of the Hurricane II variants, from the data I've seen. Against an Oscar, or most Japanese bombers, I would think 8 x .303 would be plenty of firepower.

What models of Hurricanes were sent to Asia?
The Hurricane Mk.IIB had 12 brownings, not 8, and over 3000 were built.
Though some of those were later modified with cannon wings, when the 20mm cannons problems were ironed out, and enough were being produced.
I think the aircraft Brownings had a 1200rpm firing rate, so that might not have ended up with that much firing time.
That's a combined firing rate of 240 bullets a second.

 

[J.A.W.]

What models of Hurricanes were sent to Asia?
The Hurricane Mk.IIB had 12 brownings, not 8, and over 3000 were built.
Though some of those were later modified with cannon wings, when the 20mm cannons problems were ironed out, and enough were being produced.
I think the aircraft Brownings had a 1200rpm firing rate, so that might not have ended up with that much firing time.
That's a combined firing rate of 240 bullets a second.

Weren't later production (most of 'em, there too many, by 1/2!) Hurricanes 'universal wing' types, with .303' in 8, or 12, or 4 x 20mm?

 

[J.A.W.]

Weren't later production (most of 'em, there too many, by 1/2!) Hurricanes 'universal wing' conversion-capable types, with .303' in 8, or 12, or 4 x 20mm?

Whoops! I did it again, shizzle...

 

[PAT303]

Part of what the Spitfire VIII pilot was saying referred to the .303" bullets
being visually deflected away from Me 109s at highly oblique angles - which is a function of the dural armour-plates set to do so.

You can't see a bullet in flight, what he most likely saw was the flash from the incendiary rounds or the swirl from a tracer. I've also heard it being described as sparks as the bullets bounced off which is impossible.

 

[J.A.W.]

You can't see a bullet in flight, what he most likely saw was the flash from the incendiary rounds or the swirl from a tracer. I've also heard it being described as sparks as the bullets bounced off which is impossible.

Seriously? You haven't done much shooting, or maybe you've had visual acuity issues?

Bullets in flight certainly can be seen, at those angles & so can ricochets, as Alan Peart noted.

What use would tracer rounds be, in low-light conditions, if you couldn't see 'em?

How is you've missed ever seeing a moving image of real shooting, combat or sport/fun, from TV news to youtube?

 

[RCAFson]

This is what I could find going back through the book as far as Hurricane engagements:

Page 22 - Summary of fighting between March and June 1942. 64th Sentai lost 11 x Ki-43 and ten pilots. The author specifically notes here that 10 of the 11 were lost to AVG P-40s and 1 to a Blenheim. Allied losses were also 11 aircraft - 1 x P-40, 6 x Hurricanes, 2 x Hudsons, 1 x Blenheim, and 1 x B-17E.

This disparity in outcomes at this point can probably be attributable to the 'boom and zoom' tactics* which AVG was using right out the gate, but RAF took a while to adapt.

Page 26 - 9 December 1942, Hurricanes from 135 and 136 Sqns intercepted 24 Ki-43-Ib from 8th 50th and 64th Sentai escorting 21 x Ki-48s. The RAF fighters were bounced, and 2 x Hurricanes were shot down. No JAAF losses indicated.

15 December 1942, "action over Chittagong" 50th Sentai claimed 6 x Hurricanes and lost 1 x Ki-43 (no confirmation from Allied records shown here).

16 December 1942 50th Sentai was escorting 20 x Ki-51s and intercepted by Hurricanes from 607 and 615 Sqns. 3 x Hurricanes from 607 and 615 RAF shot down, plus 1 Hudson, for 1 x Ki-43-Ib (pilot captured).

20 December 1942 RAF raid with 12 Hurricanes escorting 14 Blenheims, intercepted by 3 x Ki-43s that scrambled from the base. Lt Nakazaki was hit by 20mm shells but claimed two Hurricanes, whiel Sgt. Anabuki claimed 1 Hurricane and a Blenheim (don't know if these are confirmed).

22 December 1942 50th Sentai claims 2 x Hurricanes for no loss (don't know if confirmed)

24 December 1942 Hurricane IIC attack Magwe. Six Ki-43 scramble to defend. Two Ki-43s were damaged (trailing white smoke) but shot down 2 x Hurricane IIC (Sgt E. Kostromin of 607 Sq and Flg Off C.D. Fergusson are named as shot down). Sgt Anabuki had forgotten to retract the undercarriage of his Ki-43. No Ki-43s were shot down, although one wrecked while landing (pilot survived).

14 January 1943 50th Sentai claimed 2 Hurricanes for no loss (don't know if confirmed)

18 January 1943 16 x Ki-43 from 50th Sentai escort 18 x Ki-21 to Chittagong. 2 Oscars return with engine trouble, the top cover of 2 x Ki-43s are bounced by 8 x Hurricanes from 136 and 3 x Hurricanes from 136 Sqn. Lt. Nakazaki's aircraft was badly damaged by 20mm canon shells. He crashed his plane into an allied ship and died. 50th Sentai claimed 3 but only got 1 Hurricane.

Loss Summary Dec 1942 - January 1943 50th Sentai claimed 40 victories. Actual Allied losses were 5 x Hurricane and 1 x P-40. 3 50th Sentai pilots were lost during this period.

Data from Bloody Shambles V3:

10 Dec 3 Hurricanes shot down, 1 Ki-43 (pilot became PoW)

15 Dec 10 Hurricanes bounced the IJAAF force and shot down 1 Ki-48, another force landed, 1 Ki-43 shot down (pilot became PoW). No Hurricane losses.

16 Dec 2 Hurricanes shot down, 1 Hurricane force landed. I Hudson shot down. 4 Ki-43 crashed, probably due to weather.

19 Dec 2 Wellingtons crash landed after attacks by Ki-43s.

20 Dec 1 Bisley destroyed by AA No Hurricane losses

21 Dec Hurricane shot down a Ki-46 (confirmed by IJAAF records)

22 December Hurricane night fighters; 1 Ki-21 shot down, one force landed. no Hurricane losses.

24 Dec 2 Hurricanes shot down, and one Ki-43 (pilot killed) lost to Hurricane strafing.

14 January No Hurricane losses recorded.

17 Jan 1 Hurricane shot down by Ki-43

22 Jan 1 of 2 Hurricanes on recon shot down by Ki-43s

23 Jan 1 Hurricane and 1 ki-43 (Major Nakazaki) shot down

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

Well that was not the case in Burma, I can tell you that.

I assume the comment refers to Hurricane operation types, not Clostermann

Maybe so, but his personal account relates to December 1943, with heavy Hurricane losses to both flak & fighters for no useful result

And it is clear you are going to repeat the claim. Given this might I suggest the books of Captain WE Johns, several set in World War II, including at least one relevant to the main topic here, the RAF in India soundly defeating a large Japanese air raid after Biggles once again revealed the enemy plot. Like your use of Clostermann the air force records can be considered irrelevant, maybe one or both sides under or over reporting and so on. Johns wrote quite a few WWII Biggles books, plenty of your apparent standard of source material to digest.

Le Grande Cirque (The Big Show) was published in 1951, think of what access to RAF records was at the time. Some examples Clostermann and,

The high altitude interception over Scapa flow, it happened but he was not one of the pilots,

The massacre of 184 squadron Hurricanes, it did not happen, his date is 4 December 1943. He was with 602 squadron at Detling in December 1943, along with 184 squadron.

The shooting down of Walter Nowotny, it happened but long before Clostermann says and was done in combat with the USAAF.

8 Tempests strafe target, 2 survive, never happened.

To use the alias, when Squadron Leader Rene Mouchotte was shot down and killed Clostermann was the number 2 who lost his leader in the fight, apparently it was considered wise to transfer Clostermann

Clostermann quote about Overlord, "The Typhoons were the stars of the R.A.F. during the Normandy landings. Again and again they rescued Allied units from situations of dire peril by taking on the German Panzers. It is no exaggeration to say that it was in great part due to them that the operations of June, July and August 1944 went ahead without disastrous setbacks."

And so on, to quote some private correspondence from someone who read the book in French and had some talks with him

"There are many instances of Clostermann being wrong, sometimes deliberately so. The second edition of his book shows various differences with the first, including corrections (e.g. German losses during 2nd Schweinfürt have gone down). "

An unsupported Clostermann quote belongs in the what if section.

There was no Hurricane universal wing, with the Sabre in deep trouble it was Hurricanes or nothing from Britain/Hawker. The initial shipments to the Far East in December 1941 were mark IIB, then IIC and I (for training) from March 1942, a couple of IID in early 1942 then from December 1942, mark IV from June 1943, note these are the destinations as shipped, there were diversions. Britain officially built 441 IIA (Aug 40 to Jun 41), 3,178 IIB (Feb 41 to Nov 42) and 4,751 IIC (Mar 41 to Jul 44). Canada 515 IIB (Nov 41 to Jun 42, Feb and Mar 43) but many were fitted with C wings on arrival in Britain, as did some of the 150 diverted from the RCAF order for mark IIB(Can) later called mark XII. So they entered RAF service as IIC.

AIR 16/1036 extract

 

[J.A.W.]

I assume the comment refers to Hurricane operation types, not Clostermann


And it is clear you are going to repeat the claim. Given this might I suggest the books of Captain WE Johns, several set in World War II, including at least one relevant to the main topic here, the RAF in India soundly defeating a large Japanese air raid after Biggles once again revealed the enemy plot. Like your use of Clostermann the air force records can be considered irrelevant, maybe one or both sides under or over reporting and so on. Johns wrote quite a few WWII Biggles books, plenty of your apparent standard of source material to digest.

Le Grande Cirque (The Big Show) was published in 1951, think of what access to RAF records was at the time. Some examples Clostermann and,

The high altitude interception over Scapa flow, it happened but he was not one of the pilots,

The massacre of 184 squadron Hurricanes, it did not happen, his date is 4 December 1943. He was with 602 squadron at Detling in December 1943, along with 184 squadron.

The shooting down of Walter Nowotny, it happened but long before Clostermann says and was done in combat with the USAAF.

8 Tempests strafe target, 2 survive, never happened.

To use the alias, when Squadron Leader Rene Mouchotte was shot down and killed Clostermann was the number 2 who lost his leader in the fight, apparently it was considered wise to transfer Clostermann

Clostermann quote about Overlord, "The Typhoons were the stars of the R.A.F. during the Normandy landings. Again and again they rescued Allied units from situations of dire peril by taking on the German Panzers. It is no exaggeration to say that it was in great part due to them that the operations of June, July and August 1944 went ahead without disastrous setbacks."

And so on, to quote some private correspondence from someone who read the book in French and had some talks with him

"There are many instances of Clostermann being wrong, sometimes deliberately so. The second edition of his book shows various differences with the first, including corrections (e.g. German losses during 2nd Schweinfürt have gone down). "

An unsupported Clostermann quote belongs in the what if section.

There was no Hurricane universal wing, with the Sabre in deep trouble it was Hurricanes or nothing from Britain/Hawker. The initial shipments to the Far East in December 1941 were mark IIB, then IIC and I (for training) from March 1942, a couple of IID in early 1942 then from December 1942, mark IV from June 1943, note these are the destinations as shipped, there were diversions. Britain officially built 441 IIA (Aug 40 to Jun 41), 3,178 IIB (Feb 41 to Nov 42) and 4,751 IIC (Mar 41 to Jul 44). Canada 515 IIB (Nov 41 to Jun 42, Feb and Mar 43) but many were fitted with C wings on arrival in Britain, as did some of the 150 diverted from the RCAF order for mark IIB(Can) later called mark XII. So they entered RAF service as IIC.

AIR 16/1036 extract

Case of too much Merlin, not enough Sabre production - a typically sad British industrial 'cock-up' - if there ever was one.

Hurricanes were a death trap in the ETO, by 1942, & Spitfire Vs were not far behind. Clostermann correctly stated these facts,
& by 1944, even the best performing Merlin Spitfires were being relegated to unsuitable fighter-bomber roles in the 2nd TAF.

Realistically, only the Mustang & Mosquito were making good use of the Merlin (plus the Lancaster, technically if not tactically).

Edit; According to D.N. James, in his book 'Hawker An Aircraft Album' on page 73, late production Hurricanes did indeed have a
"...universal wing" & yes, they were sent to Burma.

 

[EwenS]

Indomitable shipped a number of Hurricane Mk.I from Egypt to Ceylon in March 1942 (probably 10 along with 40 Mk.II) as there were not enough Mk.II prepared and ready at the relevant MUs. 5 of these flew operationally with 258 squadron on 5th April 1942 during the Japanese attack on Colombo. 3 were shot down.

 

[PAT303]

Seriously? You haven't done much shooting

Shot my whole life, I shoot for food where I am, you must have fantastic vision to see a bullet flying through the air out to 200-300 meters, never seen one yet except for say a .22 under perfect conditions.

 

[J.A.W.]

Shot my whole life, I shoot for food where I am, you must have fantastic vision to see a bullet flying through the air out to 200-300 meters, never seen one yet except for say a .22 under perfect conditions.

I started out as a 'Smiley Gets a Gun' type kid with an air-rifle, went to a semi-auto .22, & by being a 'responsible' teen, got my hands
on my old man's minter long/heavy-barrel .303, & yes, I could see those bullets go downline in good light, & see them hit, or ping off...

 

[PAT303]

What use would tracer rounds be, in low-light conditions, if you couldn't see 'em?

If you could see bullets in flight why do you need tracers?.

Bullets in flight certainly can be seen, at those angles & so can ricochets, as Alan Peart noted.

Probably 30 years ago I put this theory to the test by shooting up old car bodies on the farm, I deliberately shot at the flattest angles possible and the bullets, 6.5x55, 303 and 8x57 all dug in, even across the flattest panels like the bonnet, none bounced, and that was steel. I'd like to see evidence of bullets not penetrating through the alloy skin of fighters, there would be no need for pilot armor or self sealing tanks if they did.

 

[J.A.W.]

If you could see bullets in flight why do you need tracers?.


Probably 30 years ago I put this theory to the test by shooting up old car bodies on the farm, I deliberately shot at the flattest angles possible and the bullets, 6.5x55, 303 and 8x57 all dug in, even across the flattest panels like the bonnet, none bounced, and that was steel. I'd like to see evidence of bullets not penetrating through the alloy skin of fighters, there would be no need for pilot armor or self sealing tanks if they did.

Tracers are for A, poor shots (as too many pilots were) & B, Fun factor for the shooter/fear factor for the recipient.

(Some 'cold war' tanks had a co-axial mg to aim-check the main gun, with tracer, IIRC).

Edit: Car panel steel is shit, so are cast iron engine blocks, try a crown-wheel out of a diff/final drive (& ball rounds, not hunters).

Adit: There is an article here in this forum somewhere, with the RAF gun trials report on Me 109 dural plate armour.