WW2 Myths

[Emac44]

Well if Emac44 wanted to but he does not seem to go on with the conversation so it is cool.

Henk there is not a problem with discussing the debate whatsoever. but the forum is about WW2 Myths not about Governmental operations in South Africa or Australia or any other Commonwealth Nations and the problems of indiginous populations in those countries. So we can discuss it elsewhere if you like just not in this current Forum about WW2 Myths ok. Have already began a new thread under politics Commonwealth Nations Native Population Problems etc. So if you want to discuss this further Henk we shall go to the thread I started for that very purpose ok

 

[joebong]

Taken from; Messerschmitt 262 by Ed Maloney Frank Ryan.
Notes from; Hans Langer, " We experimented with rocket assist devices in 1943.
While in flight, if we fired two bottles it would put us near mach 1, and with three bottles you would go into mach 1 in a level attitude." This next one has always bugged me. The Tiger 2 tank nearly indistructible has been speciously defamed as a ungainly, cumbersome fortress gun. Yet in its performance specs
it displays adequit albeit not stellar ability. Taken from; Osprey publications,
"King Tiger" by Tom Jentz Hillary Doyle, " The authors paid a visit to the Tiger
II(Fgst.Nr. 280273, produced in Oct 44) now located in La Gleize. Driving a modern car to the village on narrow, steep and sharply curved roads, had required frequent use of low gears. That TigerIIs had managed to make the same trip in winter was indeed an impressive testimony to both their manoeuvrability and mobility.

 

[renrich]

In an earlier post on this thread someone stated that it was not true that the SBDs at Midway caught the IJN carriers with their flight decks full of armed A/C ready to take off for a strike. The best researched book I have ever seen on the activities of US Navy air at Midway is THE FIRST TEAM by John B Lundstrom, Naval Institute Press, 1984. He states that at 1020 the flagship Akagi gave the signal to launch planes. Ten or so minutes later the flight decks of the 4 carriers would have been clear of planes. At 1022 McClusky pushed over on the Kaga along with 24 other SBDs. At 1025 5 SBDs attacked Akagi just as the first fighters began to roll off her flight deck. They hit her with 2 1000 lb bombs. Leslie's SBDs attacked Soryu only minutes later. Her flight deck was shattered by 3 1000 lb bombs and her 18 carrier bombers exploded in flames. In her hangar 9 armed carrier attack planes scorched her insides. In 5 minutes the Japanese lost the battle of Midway. It doesn't sound to me that there is any myth there.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In an earlier post on this thread someone stated that it was not true that the SBDs at Midway caught the IJN carriers with their flight decks full of armed A/C ready to take off for a strike. The best researched book I have ever seen on the activities of US Navy air at Midway is THE FIRST TEAM by John B Lundstrom, Naval Institute Press, 1984. He states that at 1020 the flagship Akagi gave the signal to launch planes. Ten or so minutes later the flight decks of the 4 carriers would have been clear of planes. At 1022 McClusky pushed over on the Kaga along with 24 other SBDs. At 1025 5 SBDs attacked Akagi just as the first fighters began to roll off her flight deck. They hit her with 2 1000 lb bombs. Leslie's SBDs attacked Soryu only minutes later. Her flight deck was shattered by 3 1000 lb bombs and her 18 carrier bombers exploded in flames. In her hangar 9 armed carrier attack planes scorched her insides. In 5 minutes the Japanese lost the battle of Midway. It doesn't sound to me that there is any myth there.

My high school had an aeronautics class. The instructor was a former Dauntless gunner who participated in the Battle of Midway - his descriptions is just as most of our history books depict the battle.

 

[mkloby]

This is taken from the US Navy webpage.

"In the hour after about 0930, U.S. Navy planes from the carriers Hornet (CV-8), Enterprise (CV-6) and Yorktown (CV-5) made a series of attacks, initially by three squadrons of TBD torpedo planes that, despite nearly total losses, made no hits. The sacrifice of the TBDs did slow Japanese preparations for their own strike and disorganized the defending fighters. Then, at about 1025, everything changed. Three squadrons of SBD scout bombers, two from Enterprise and one from Yorktown, almost simultaneously dove on three of the four Japanese carriers, whose decks were crowded with fully armed and fueled planes that were just starting to take off. In a few minutes, Akagi, Kaga and Soryu were ablaze and out of action."

 

[timshatz]

Book that came out around Christmas of '05 says the decks were clear. Name of the book is "Shattered Sword" Good book, decent read. Also states that the Zeros were back on station by the time the Dive Bombers came as the Devastators were destroyed about an hour earlier.

On a side note and one very good point mentioned in the book was about the Zero cap over the Japanese fleet. As the Japanese had no Radar, there was no radar direction. There was no fighter director (in it's infancy in the US fleet but still there). The Zero Cap was directed by the flight leaders. As such, it acted organically and was not directed by a central intercept command. In short, the Zeros acted much as white blood cells do when a foriegn bacteria invades a body. The Japanese ships would fire AAA at the ships which would alert the Zeros. As a consequence, any Zero that saw the AAA would react and head for the intruding bombers. There was no reserve, there were no waves of fighters attacking (producing a target rich environment). It was more of a bum rush, everybody into the pool and smother the incoming attack. The US Divebomber attacks came from different directions at the same time, unintentionally but very effectively exploiting the weakness of the Japanese Cap.

So says the book. It was very interesting reading.

On the other hand...

FBJ's teacher was there and saw it. Granted, any trial lawyer will tell you that memory is faulty, snap glimpses of an incident can be very error prone and as a tail gunner in an SBD, he was probably very busy and maybe too busy to make an accurate accessment. But he says the decks were full. The book says they were clear with a strike below decks on the way to be spotted.

But still, he was there.

That's the part about history that gets to me. Two competing and very credible opinions of an account. One, researched to the hilt, the other, first person.

Which one?

 

[mkloby]

Book that came out around Christmas of '05 says the decks were clear. Name of the book is "Shattered Sword" Good book, decent read. Also states that the Zeros were back on station by the time the Dive Bombers came as the Devastators were destroyed about an hour earlier.

On a side note and one very good point mentioned in the book was about the Zero cap over the Japanese fleet. As the Japanese had no Radar, there was no radar direction. There was no fighter director (in it's infancy in the US fleet but still there). The Zero Cap was directed by the flight leaders. As such, it acted organically and was not directed by a central intercept command. In short, the Zeros acted much as white blood cells do when a foriegn bacteria invades a body. The Japanese ships would fire AAA at the ships which would alert the Zeros. As a consequence, any Zero that saw the AAA would react and head for the intruding bombers. There was no reserve, there were no waves of fighters attacking (producing a target rich environment). It was more of a bum rush, everybody into the pool and smother the incoming attack. The US Divebomber attacks came from different directions at the same time, unintentionally but very effectively exploiting the weakness of the Japanese Cap.

So says the book. It was very interesting reading.

On the other hand...

FBJ's teacher was there and saw it. Granted, any trial lawyer will tell you that memory is faulty, snap glimpses of an incident can be very error prone and as a tail gunner in an SBD, he was probably very busy and maybe too busy to make an accurate accessment. But he says the decks were full. The book says they were clear with a strike below decks on the way to be spotted.

But still, he was there.

That's the part about history that gets to me. Two competing and very credible opinions of an account. One, researched to the hilt, the other, first person.

Which one?

Interesting. You have a good point, and I'd like to read the book. However, I would go with the US Navy's official historical account over a book, which seems to corroborate what many of the pilots, such as Joe's teacher, have stated.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

No matter how you slice it, 4 Japanese carriers sunk that day....

 

[comiso90]

No matter how you slice it, 4 Japanese carriers sunk that day....

That's a BIG slice of Hell Yeah! Here's to the codebreakers and recon peeps that did their part....

 

[trackend]

Agreed FBJ its the end result that counts in any battle.

 

[Emac44]

I will go by eye witness accounts. They were there others were not and at end of day 4 Jap Carriers got burnt like toast

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Besides as you just said. Who really cares if the planes were on the deck or or not. The Carriers went down, nothing is taking off or landing from them again.

I too go with eyewitness acounts over anything.

 

[timshatz]

MKL, the book is very good. It goes into depth on the subject and is very well researched. While I agree with the majority of the posts on this subject (first person accounts get my vote in most cases, especially if they are not drunk and are trained observers- which a tail gunner would be in this case), the book goes into detail about the difference in the doctrine of the Japanese Carriers and US Carriers. The Japanese, unlike the US, did not use the forward part of the flight deck as a plane park. All aircraft were struck below immediately upon landing. Strikes were brought up on deck and launched, not serviced on deck. The aircraft that were seen taking off during the attack (at least one carrier, I think it was the Akagi, was reported to have aircraft taking off as the dive bombers rolled into their dives-this comes from multiple sources, Japanese and American) were being launched to reinforce/replace the cap.

Here's a link to the Amazon post for the book.

Amazon.com: Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway: Books: Jonathan Parshall,Anthony Tully

I think we will see a bunch of books like this in the future. As more and more of those who fought in WW2 leave us, the history of the event (and the events themselves) will be re-appraised. This can be good as it sometimes is the product of excellent research from unknown or ignored sources. Other times, it will be painful as the research will stink and the book will be written with political intent. Sadly, telling the two apart will not be an easy job as most layman are not particularly critical in their analysis ("They said it on TV so it must be true").

 

[mkloby]

"They said it on TV so it must be true".

Not everything on TV is true???

 

[renrich]

Lundstrom's book, THE FIRST TEAM (Pacific Naval Air Com bat from Pearl Harbor to Midway) is exhaustively footnoted with also a lengthy appendix. He even has the Bureau nos. of all fighter aircraft in Squadrons embarked Nov. 1941-June 1942. Many of the participants at Midway were interviewed and they are listed. Japanese records were consulted and are quoted. There is an interesting account of Jimmy Thach meeting with a torpedo squadron before the battle and trying to give them some tactics to use against the Zeros. Of course there is a lengthy account of how the Thach Weave was used successfully during the battle. Lundstrom has published a second volume called THE FIRST TEAM AND THE GUADALCANAL CAMPAIGN( Naval Fighter Combat from August to November 1942) I have it also and it is as well researched as the other book. I would strongly recommend these two books to any serious student of WW2 in the Pacific.

 

[timshatz]

Not everything on TV is true???

Only if George Cloony or Babs says it. Then, you can take it to the bank!

 

[renrich]

Not a myth now but was during the war and after for a while was that Colin Kelly in a B17 sank the Haruna off the Philipines on the mission when he was shot down and killed. Also that many of the IJN ships that were sunk at Midway were sunk from high altitude by B17s.

 

[pbfoot]

Not a myth now but was during the war and after for a while was that Colin Kelly in a B17 sank the Haruna off the Philipines on the mission when he was shot down and killed. Also that many of the IJN ships that were sunk at Midway were sunk from high altitude by B17s.

hence the naming of Kelly AFB

 

[comiso90]

Not a myth now but was during the war and after for a while was that Colin Kelly in a B17 sank the Haruna off the Philipines on the mission when he was shot down and killed. Also that many of the IJN ships that were sunk at Midway were sunk from high altitude by B17s.

I haven't read much about B-17 anti-shipping success in the Pacific. Does any one have more info? What kind of bombs did they use against naval vessels? What type of Bomb run/formation? Success rate?

 

[timshatz]

I haven't read much about B-17 anti-shipping success in the Pacific. Does any one have more info? What kind of bombs did they use against naval vessels? What type of Bomb run/formation? Success rate?

One of the few I have read about was a Japanese destroyer they hit during the Guadalcanal Campaign. Captain was up close to a sinking cargo ship, taking of survivors, when some B17s made a run on him from high altitude. He's been up and down the Slot plenty and thought nothing of it, having seen them miss by plenty before. Not this time. They clobbered his ship. When they picked him up and asked him about it, he said, "Every once and a while even the B17s get lucky".

I'm sure they hit others, but not a lot. The whole idea that they could hit anything from 20K ft was just a snow job on Congress to get a 4 engined strategic bomber approved. Congress was against it so the Army billed it as being a Coastal Defense weapon. It worked enough for them to design and build some.