Japan and WW II

vamrat

Merarches
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
9,471
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Omaha
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  ::)
Then you haven't looked hard enough!   ;)
It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  :laugh:
I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!
 

Marc1152

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
14,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Maryland
J Michael said:
vamrat said:
montalban said:
What effect sharpened sticks?

I thought we all understood the term resolve here
You can resolve to smash a brick wall down with your forehead.  My money is on your head popping first.  Likewise, I'll bet the Japanese would tire of getting killed long before we tired of killing them.

Lots and lots and lot of sharpened sticks vs. lots of rifles, artillery, machine guns, bombs, etc.?  Sticks lose.
The Imperial Army still had plenty of guns and ammo left. The civilian thing was a reserve meant to harass us, just like in Vietnam.
 

TheTrisagion

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
17,819
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
40
Location
PA, USA
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  ::)
Then you haven't looked hard enough!   ;)
It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  :laugh:
I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!
Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  :eek:
 

J Michael

Toumarches
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
People's Soviet Socialist Republic of Marylan
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  ::)
Then you haven't looked hard enough!   ;)
It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  :laugh:
I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!
Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  :eek:
It would depend on who has them and where they're pointing, I would think.  ;D
 

vamrat

Merarches
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
9,471
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Omaha
J Michael said:
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
vamrat said:
TheTrisagion said:
This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  ::)
Then you haven't looked hard enough!   ;)
It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  :laugh:
I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!
Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  :eek:
It would depend on who has them and where they're pointing, I would think.  ;D
When you have the suicidal bravery of a Japenese infantryman in a banzai charge, you laugh off such threats!
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
60
Location
Maryland
montalban said:
Japanese had superior tactics, and one of the best fighters at that time (best, when confronting antiquated tactics; of getting into a dog-fight with the Zero)
I don't know where you are getting this "superior tactics" thing. The Thach Weave (to take an example) compensated for the Zero's then-superiority by Midway.

When talking about Savo Island, it should be kept in mind that, for all the naval losses, the Japanese failed to put a significant crimp in the Guadalcanal campaign.
 

Strongylocentrotus

Jr. Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
North Fork of Davis Creek, Modoc County, Californi
montalban said:
Keble said:
Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.
Initially America had a lot of poor performing planes, including the Brewster F2A Buffalo, Douglas TBD Devastator.

They had marginal planes such as the Kittyhawk and Wildcat
America used F2A-3 in WWII.  This was a heavier version of the F2A-1 which was used so effectively in Findland against Soviet airforce.  Problem at Midway was mostly the operational inexperience of US aircrews.  The F2A-3 thus served as a sort of scapegoat for lack of experience of American Pilots.  This was displayed by most of the American air units participating in battle, with the exception of the carrier Yorktown and some elements of Enterprise.  F4F-3 and F4F-4, as well as P-40 series were effective in holding the line until newer types began arriving in 1943, once the pilots figured out how to fight with them.  It think in the beginning it was more a matter of marginal pilot skill (compared to Japanese) than marginal airplanes.  I think, the biggest disparity in equipment quality was in the torpedoes.  The Japanese torpedos were much better designed and the American torpedoes frankly sucked.  As for the torpedo bombers, the Nakijima B5N was best in the world at this time, and the TBD was badly outclassed in comparison, but even the better designed TBF came up short at Midway.  This was mostly because of air operational failure, poorly trained aircrews (most of VT-8 never even launched a torpedo in training before taking on the Nihon Kaigun), and sucky torpedoes, rather than aircraft failure.  TBD did well enough at Coral Sea attacking Shoho and I don't think a TBF ever a sank ship with a torpedo.  Of course what does it say about all of us Orthocks, that we have so many informed opinions about Pacific War?
 

montalban

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
53
Location
Sydney
Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.

 

Strongylocentrotus

Jr. Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
North Fork of Davis Creek, Modoc County, Californi
montalban said:
Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.
Yup.  The British used the export version of the same F2A-3 that the Marines were stuck with in Midway.  Just like the Marines, the British airmen, mostly from Australia and New Zealand were inexperienced in combat air operations.  In addition, their version was even more underpowered with refurbished Wasp radials from DC-3 airliners.  These radials had a problem with oil leaks, which was aggravated by the tropical operating condtitions.  The British lost many Brewsters to accidents, poor maintenance and ground Japanese ground attacks. 

In the East Indies, the Brewsters were slightly different from what the British were using, the Dutch version was slightly lighter and was equiped with better WASP engines.  The biggest problem faced by the Dutch was that they were heavily outnumbered in the Japanese onslaught.  They were however, more successful than the British in their air operations, and even used the Brewster with some success as a dive bomber against Japanese troopships, before they were finally overwhelmed by superior numbers.

A great account of both British and Dutch air operations in Malaysia, Burma and the East Indies is volume one of the three volume A Bloody Shambles series, which describes just how unprepared those forces were in fighting the Japanese.

In contrast to American, Dutch and British experiences, the Finns were altogether successful with their Brewsters.  Like the British and Dutch, the Finns also used a de-navalized version of the F2A, but theirs was the F2A-1 model which initially was lighter, but then they added armor plate and four 12.7 mm M/G which reduced the Finnish model's performance, so that it was actually slower than the F2B-3 version used by the Brits and Dutch.  The Finns also had the same problem with oil leaks from the refurbished WASPs, but they solved it by inverting one of the cylinder rings in each cylinder.  I have no idea why this worked, but it apparently did and maybe the arctic operating conditions helped also.  More importantly, the Finns benefited from the mistakes of others and figured how to fight the Brewster to its best advantage, by making slashing dive attacks on Soviet bombers using the heavy M/G to rip the Soviet aircraft apart.  They also took advantage of the Buff's long range (the Buff had a wet wing and had an range comparable to a A6M2), and consequent fight endurance to loiter and make repeated attacks on Soviet formations.  Finally, one cannot overstate the contribution to Finnish succes by the poor aircrew quality and inept air operations of the Soviet airforce, whose most experienced members were exterminated during Stalin's purges.  Consequently, In Finnish hands the Brewster achieved a kill ratio of 26:1, ironically making the type both one of the worst and yet one of most most successful types deployed in WWII.  Trivia:  One Brewster airframe in Finnish service alone accounted for over forty confirmed kills at the hands of its various pilots, making it the single highest scoring fighter airframe so far in aviation history.  Finnish Brewsters were finally scrapped in 1953.

**Other countries that purchased Brewster in WII were the French and Belgians.  Oddly enough the USAAF took advantage of the Buffalo's long range to operate the type as a photo recon aircraft from Australia early in 1942.
 

montalban

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
53
Location
Sydney
Strongylocentrotus said:
montalban said:
Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.
Yup.  The British used the export version of the same F2A-3 that the Marines were stuck with in Midway.  Just like the Marines, the British airmen, mostly from Australia and New Zealand were inexperienced in combat air operations.  In addition, their version was even more underpowered with refurbished Wasp radials from DC-3 airliners.  These radials had a problem with oil leaks, which was aggravated by the tropical operating condtitions.  The British lost many Brewsters to accidents, poor maintenance and ground Japanese ground attacks. 

In the East Indies, the Brewsters were slightly different from what the British were using, the Dutch version was slightly lighter and was equiped with better WASP engines.  The biggest problem faced by the Dutch was that they were heavily outnumbered in the Japanese onslaught.  They were however, more successful than the British in their air operations, and even used the Brewster with some success as a dive bomber against Japanese troopships, before they were finally overwhelmed by superior numbers.

A great account of both British and Dutch air operations in Malaysia, Burma and the East Indies is volume one of the three volume A Bloody Shambles series, which describes just how unprepared those forces were in fighting the Japanese.

In contrast to American, Dutch and British experiences, the Finns were altogether successful with their Brewsters.  Like the British and Dutch, the Finns also used a de-navalized version of the F2A, but theirs was the F2A-1 model which initially was lighter, but then they added armor plate and four 12.7 mm M/G which reduced the Finnish model's performance, so that it was actually slower than the F2B-3 version used by the Brits and Dutch.  The Finns also had the same problem with oil leaks from the refurbished WASPs, but they solved it by inverting one of the cylinder rings in each cylinder.  I have no idea why this worked, but it apparently did and maybe the arctic operating conditions helped also.  More importantly, the Finns benefited from the mistakes of others and figured how to fight the Brewster to its best advantage, by making slashing dive attacks on Soviet bombers using the heavy M/G to rip the Soviet aircraft apart.  They also took advantage of the Buff's long range (the Buff had a wet wing and had an range comparable to a A6M2), and consequent fight endurance to loiter and make repeated attacks on Soviet formations.  Finally, one cannot overstate the contribution to Finnish succes by the poor aircrew quality and inept air operations of the Soviet airforce, whose most experienced members were exterminated during Stalin's purges.  Consequently, In Finnish hands the Brewster achieved a kill ratio of 26:1, ironically making the type both one of the worst and yet one of most most successful types deployed in WWII.   Trivia:  One Brewster airframe in Finnish service alone accounted for over forty confirmed kills at the hands of its various pilots, making it the single highest scoring fighter airframe so far in aviation history.  Finnish Brewsters were finally scrapped in 1953.

**Other countries that purchased Brewster in WII were the French and Belgians.  Oddly enough the USAAF took advantage of the Buffalo's long range to operate the type as a photo recon aircraft from Australia early in 1942.
They weren't British airmen from Australia! They were Australian airmen from Australia!
 

Strongylocentrotus

Jr. Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
North Fork of Davis Creek, Modoc County, Californi
montalban said:
Strongylocentrotus said:
montalban said:
Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.
They weren't British airmen from Australia! They were Australian airmen from Australia!
You right.  What I know?  To me they are all British Empire forces.  RAF, RNZAF, RAAF, RCAF.  Too many abbreviations.  Dutch not Dutch either, Royal Netherlands Army Airforce (Luchtvaartafdeling).  they are ML-KNIL(Military Air Service of the Royal Netherlands East Indian Army). So what?  I not write wikipedia article.
 

Strongylocentrotus

Jr. Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
69
Location
North Fork of Davis Creek, Modoc County, Californi
Also, Star Trek had a sequence where the USS Enterpirse and the USS Yamato are involved because the producers wished to note in the future we all get along; a ship with an antecedent in a US WWII vessel, and a ship with an antecedent in the Japanese Imperial Navy. I thought - what next? The USS Heinrich Himmler?
[/quote]

Not quite Brother.  Yamato is the ancient name of Japan (the region where Japan was born, I think) and Heinrich Himler is the name of a war criminal.  The Yamato's sister-ship Musashi, was also an ancient Japanese place name of the province around Tokyo.  The Nihon Kaigun (Imperial Japanese Navy) often had poetic names for their war ships.  The names of the six carriers that attacked Pearl Harbor were Akagi (Red Castle) Kaga (Increased Joy) Hiryu (Flying Dragon) Soryu (Green Dragon) Shokaku (Dragon Flying in Heaven) Shokaku (Crane Flying in Heaven)  Zuikaku (Lucky Crane).  But my favorites are the names of their destroyers, here is a sample of the Kamikaze Class (from http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijnnames.htm):

Kamikaze: "Divine Wind"
Asakaze: "Wind from the Sea after Sunrise"
Harukaze: "Spring Wind"
Matsukaze: "Wind in the Pines"
Hatakaze: "Flag-flying Wind"
Asanagi: "Morning Calm"
Yunagi: "Evening Calm"
Oite: "Tailwind"
Hayate: "Storm Gale"
 
Top