Wildcat during the Battle of Britain

pbehn said:

What "reserve" 200 were lost in France. Between Pearl Harbor and Midway how many pilots did the USA lose? How long after the battle of Britain was that? How much had the USA already expanded its training programmes after Sept 3rd 1939?

Click to expand...

I've typed it several times already, the USA apparently wasn't doing much if any better, Richard Bong, our highest scoring ace said he had little or no gunnery training and he said he did much better after he got gunnery training sometime later in the war. He said we would have got more kills early on if he had gunnery trading at the beginning. Did you get that? It's about the 3rd or fourth time I've said it. Apparently the US Navy was one of the few groups that was really really teaching air to air gunnery.

The RAF did not have their entire force right on the channel, they had groups they held back. Train 20 guys every day for a week and swap them out with 20 guys at the front, train them. It's only a few but every pilot with better training could make a difference. 1 pilot with good gunnery training shoots down a 109 that he would have missed. That 109 doesn't shoot down another pilot that lives long enough to get gunnery training and he does the same thing. Anyway, I get massive expansion causing training issues, the USA had the same problem, should have been addressed here as well. We had more resources and were not nearly as hard pressed as Britain and an extra week or 2 of gunnery training shouldn't have been an issue but yet we apparently dropped the ball as well.

pbehn said:

RAF pilots in 1940 often remarked how keen the LW were to let them have their favourite and most effective attack on German bombers, often giving a friendly wave and tipping their caps at an amusing and jaunty angle in anticipation of a fine display of marksmanship. NOT.

Click to expand...

You do realize that this remark is directed at an actual retired F15 fighter pilot? I mean he is the real thing, not some armchair dude like me. Ignore me if you want but you should probably listen to a "been there done that" fighter pilot. The USA spent millions of dollars showing this guy how to do it .

pinsog said:

The USA spent millions of dollars showing this guy how to do it

Click to expand...

Based on lessons learned by Boelcke in 1915
Sorry, its friday night, and I am WELL into the whisky's

John Thach in 1940 had been a Navy pilot for 10 years, a lot of them as a gunnery instructor. Few other American pilots were going to have his experience. But 10 years was not needed, at least for some pilots.
Edward (Butch) O'Hare was assigned to Thach's squadron in 1940 and Thach saw something in him and made him his wingman.

In combat Thach several encounter with Japanese aircraft. At Midway he lead a 6 plane group of F4Fs escorting 12 SBDs. they were attacked by 15-20 Japanese fighters. Thach claimed 3 and a wingman claimed one for the loss of one F4F. After Midway Thach was assigned to teach combat tactics.
O'Hare claimed 5 twin engine bombers in one fight on Feb 20th 1942. Post war this was reduced to 3 but he had hit and damaged at least two more. His wingman's guns had jammed leaving O'Hare to do all the shooting and that took 4 passes at the formation of bombers.

eight of VF-3s sixteen pilots had been awarded the Gunnery "E" award (excellence) by the end of 1940. Other US squadrons may have had a much more dismal record. It might depend on the emphasis their commander placed on what kind of training. US training may have dropped quite a bit after Pearl Harbor. O'Hare was an Annapolis graduate and had served on Battleships for two years before becoming an aviator in 1939. Over two years flying in a very good squadron before seeing combat. Not typical of most other AIr Forces or even US forces in 1943-44.

Good shooting can be taught, but not to all pilots, some people are just never going to get it, but on the other hand teaching it and staying proficient at it cannot be done (for most people) in a two week "camp" once a year. Some pilots may remember from the year before and build on their knowledge, others are going to take days just to get to where they left off the year before. Perhaps the British trained twice a year? more often? correction welcome.

I would also appreciate some clarification on British training in 1939-40. Did the new pilots get 25 hours of air to air gunnery training or did they get 25 hours total time in a Hurricane or Spitfire (or some of each?) before being posted to an operational squadron. Those are two rather different things.

As I understand it, most, if not all, British eight gun fighters had shifted away from the wide spread pattern in the spring of 1940, there is a bit of a discrepancy between first order/s and squadrons acknowledging the work was completed but a Squadron using the spread pattern in Aug of 1940 would be an extreme rarity and out of date by 3-4 months.
There may also have been two different distances used for the convergence pattern. 250 and 350 yrds?

pinsog said:

You do realize that this remark is directed at an actual retired F15 fighter pilot? I mean he is the real thing, not some armchair dude like me. Ignore me if you want but you should probably listen to a "been there done that" fighter pilot. The USA spent millions of dollars showing this guy how to do it .

Click to expand...

I am fully aware of Biffs service history, the post was actually directed at you and the fanciful notion that when you are outnumbered by 2 to 1 you get to do what you want, when you want.

I stand corrected on the 8 gun spread/dispersion pattern. Apparently it had already been corrected by the BoB. Thank you Greyman and Shortround. Thanks SR and Milosh for fleshing out John Thach a bit.

pbehn said:

I am fully aware of Biffs service history, the post was actually directed at you and the fanciful notion that when you are outnumbered by 2 to 1 you get to do what you want, when you want.

Click to expand...

Wow. It just doesn't end. Ok. Yet another example of how being trained in air to air gunnery can help even when your outnumbered. I'm pretty sure when John Thach was pinned down at Midway there was only him and 2 others vs the 20 zeroes. One pilot was shot down before they started the Thach Weave so that left Thach and 2 guys vs 20 Zeroes, I don't remember where the othe 2 Wildcats were. As they started the Weave they were constantly getting bounced by Zeros and just turning into each other. All Thach could do was get in snap shots at Zeros when they popped up in front of him. He was an expert, conserved ammo, fired short accurate bursts and managed to shoot down 3 Zeros. He was outnumbered, down on the deck in a plane that had 0 cards to play against his opponent. Yet with excellent shooting he knocked down 3, didn't run out of ammo and brought the 2 pilots home that started the weave with him. That is what a well trained person can do in an out numbered situation. At least the the BoB the Hurricane had a few advantages over a 109. It turned MUCH better in the horizontal, had a good supply of ammo had a good rate of climb but maybe not quite as good as a 109, I think they were really close on climb but I'm not sure. So, if they could shoot then they have a better chance than if they can't.

Shortround6 said:

John Thach in 1940 had been a Navy pilot for 10 years, a lot of them as a gunnery instructor

Click to expand...

And as such he would probably have been at least an above average pilot in the BoB, but the theory he was practicing since 1930 in an F4B would be quickly replaced by the realities of modern combat.
Basic fighter fundamentals were known since the "Dicta Boelcke", but air warfare changed substantially in the late 30's.
My point being that Thach's instruction in 1942 was probably heavily based off lessons learned the hard way from Dec.1941 on, with observations from Europe since 1939 as well.
You drop 1942 Thach into the BoB, he would have been an asset. 1940 Thach would have to learn the hard way, just like Tuck and Malan

pbehn said:

I am fully aware of Biffs service history, the post was actually directed at you and the fanciful notion that when you are outnumbered by 2 to 1 you get to do what you want, when you want.

Click to expand...

Since you apparently still disagree with the simple notion that pilots that can hit enemy planes with their weapons is an asset:

Could you please explain to everyone how not having a clue about air to air gunnery is the way to win a battle? I mean I only have 43 years experience with firearms and you've never picked one up but apparently but you have seen some on TV so you must know it all. Please enlighten us.

pbehn said:

I am fully aware of Biffs service history, the post was actually directed at you and the fanciful notion that when you are outnumbered by 2 to 1 you get to do what you want, when you want.

Click to expand...

Pbehn,

You are correct regards uncontested set ups vice contested. The last few seconds of the pass is what delivers results, how you get there is of less importance. I imagine during the BoB the set ups (intercepts) varied, and you took what you could get.

SR,

Excellent update on Thach and O'Hare. American Airlines concourse in Chicago has a fixed wing F4F on display with O'Hares name on it. He was another bright star that went out to quickly.

Cheers,
Biff

Clayton Magnet said:

And as such he would probably have been at least an above average pilot in the BoB, but the theory he was practicing since 1930 in an F4B would be quickly replaced by the realities of modern combat.
Basic fighter fundamentals were known since the "Dicta Boelcke", but air warfare changed substantially in the late 30's.
My point being that Thach's instruction in 1942 was probably heavily based off lessons learned the hard way from Dec.1941 on, with observations from Europe since 1939 as well.
You drop 1942 Thach into the BoB, he would have been an asset. 1940 Thach would have to learn the hard way, just like Tuck and Malan

Click to expand...

A man that has lets say 5 years teaching others to shoot a towed target sleeve with say a P36 or a an F3F Grumman biplane has the skills needed to do the same with a Hurricane or F4F or a Corsair or an FW190. A man that is competent with a rifle is generally competent with any of them, maybe a few minutes to get acquainted with something a little different. A man that can fly a Spitfire can fly a Thunderbolt or an FW190. The difference between the performance in a 1936 fighter and a 1940 Hurricane was less than a 1940 Hurricane and a 1945 Spitfire or Thunderbolt or Corsair so Thach's inherit gunnery skills would be just fine.

pinsog said:

The difference between the performance in a 1936 fighter and a 1940 Hurricane was less than a 1940 Hurricane and a 1945 Spitfire

Click to expand...

The difference between a 1936 fighter and a 1940 Hurricane was less than the difference between a 1940 Hurricane and a 1941 Hurricane.
Well, debatable, but things moved fast once war were declared. A front line fighter in 1940 could have been a fabric biplane, whilst a front line fighter in 1945 could have been a swept wing jet.
Where am I going with this? who knows.
Whisky, sorry

Clayton Magnet said:

The difference between a 1936 fighter and a 1940 Hurricane was less than the difference between a 1940 Hurricane and a 1941 Hurricane.
Well, debatable, but things moved fast once war were declared. A front line fighter in 1940 could have been a fabric biplane, whilst a front line fighter in 1945 could have been a swept wing jet.
Where am I going with this? who knows.
Whisky, sorry

Click to expand...

Enjoy your drink. May I ask what brand you are indulging in? What country are you enjoying your drink in?

Somewhere on this site (and grabbed from the internet) is a picture of a Brewster Buffalo standing on it's nose after a bad landing on a Carrier. The Pilot was one John Thach. He may not have been perfect but in 10 years how many carrier landings had he made using how many different airplanes? How many firing passes at stationary targets on the ground and how many passes at towed target sleeves. He was also a man who went home tried to analyze mistakes or think up different approaches. It is said he worked out the weave maneuver on the kitchen table using match sticks to help him visualize the different planes positions at different times in the weave and the possible positions of the attackers. he did this after the outbreak of WW II in Europe as he was trying to figure out the best tactics to keep his men alive if they did get into a shooting war given the equipment they had at the time (F3Fs and Buffaloes).

The US Navy had very few engagements between Dec 7th and Midway in which to "hone" skills. They often went weeks or even several months between contacts with the Japanese in the first 6 months of WW II. They either were pretty much prepared in training or they weren't. A BoB pilot might see more engagements in a month than a US pilot saw in 6 months in 1942.

Clayton Magnet said:

My point being that Thach's instruction in 1942 was probably heavily based off lessons learned the hard way from Dec.1941 on, with observations from Europe since 1939 as well.

Click to expand...

Observations from europe yes,
lessons learned the hard way? not so much. O'Hare's medal of honor engagement was Feb 20th 1942, How many times did the US Navy pilots mix it up with japanese fighters between Dc 7th and Feb 20th?
BTW Thach was also on CAP at the same time on the other side of the task force. The CAP claimed two Mavis flying boats and 9 Betty bombers not counting the ones shot down/up by O'Hare.
Perhaps someone can find a more detailed account but it seems to have been around 5 hours from radar picking up the first Mavis to O'Hare starting his attack runs (and he starting shooting with bombers about 9 miles from the task force, not a lot of time for careful set ups). Not much time to discuss what worked and what didn't in the ready room.

Shortround6 said:

Somewhere on this site (and grabbed from the internet) is a picture of a Brewster Buffalo standing on it's nose after a bad landing on a Carrier.

Click to expand...

I believe the picture you are talking about is from March, 1940.

pinsog said:

Enjoy your drink. May I ask what brand you are indulging in? What country are you enjoying your drink in?

Click to expand...

Just some inexpensive, but solid Canadian Whisky. Alberta Premium to be exact
Ill sign off before I embarrass myself more. Good night all!

Clayton Magnet said:

The difference between a 1936 fighter and a 1940 Hurricane was less than the difference between a 1940 Hurricane and a 1941 Hurricane.
Well, debatable, but things moved fast once war were declared. A front line fighter in 1940 could have been a fabric biplane, whilst a front line fighter in 1945 could have been a swept wing jet.
Where am I going with this? who knows.
Whisky, sorry

Click to expand...

I believe it's called "whiskey SOUR".

Thach may have been one of the few people who believed Chennault's report on the Zero coming out of China.

Shortround6 said:

Thach may have been one of the few people who believed Chennault's report on the Zero coming out of China.

Click to expand...

I know after he did his "beam defense maneuver/Thach weave" on the kitchen table, he got some army P39's to attack him and I think Butch O'Hare to test it out. It worked. Even though the P39's were much faster at low altitude, they couldn't get a shot at Thach or his wingman without getting shot themselves.

pinsog said:

I actually can't. It was on here somewhere. I have also read about the new guys opening fire at 1,000 yards or more during the BoB

Click to expand...

I've read this numerous times in pilot notes, they had no actual gunnery training, just how the sight worked, there are many video's and photo's of pilots opening fire at ridiculously long range, this He111 is 500 yards out and the deflection angle has those bullets going way behind.