Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Tarawa. US get lucky? or did it prove that

Discussion in 'Land Warfare in the Pacific' started by chromeboomerang, Mar 19, 2009.

  1. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    Sorry, you are correct.

    I meant the WILDCAT. The Wildcat's kill ratio never fell below one-to-one in 1942, on a monthly basis.

    The Japanese planes were still inferior overall to most Allied aircraft simply because they were much more fragile and unreliable.

    True it's not all down to hardware, but better radios (which the Allies certainly did have), and which allowed team tactics, was hardware that the Japanese lacked. The real hardware lack that hurt the Japanese aircraft was reliable high-power-to-weight aviation engines (See Bergerud, "Fire In The Sky"). That meant they couldn't be both competitive fighters and accommodate heavy armor, adequate armament, and things like reliable radios.

    What really made the Japanese aircraft inferior was their inability to protect the valuable lives of their pilots and bring them home alive.
     
  2. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    Sorry, you are correct.

    I meant the WILDCAT. The Wildcat's kill ratio never fell below one-to-one in 1942, on a monthly basis.

    The Japanese planes were still inferior overall to most Allied aircraft simply because they were much more fragile and unreliable.

    True it's not all down to hardware, but better radios (which the Allies certainly did have), and which allowed team tactics, was hardware that the Japanese lacked. The real hardware lack that hurt the Japanese aircraft was reliable high-power-to-weight aviation engines (See Bergerud, "Fire In The Sky"). That meant they couldn't be both competitive fighters and accommodate heavy armor, adequate armament, and things like reliable radios.

    What really made the Japanese aircraft inferior was their inability to protect the valuable lives of their pilots and bring them home alive.
     
  3. chromeboomerang

    chromeboomerang New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ok, Wildcat. You still have no point with a one on one ratio. That does not show the Wildcat as superior, rather that's a dead heat. Wildcat was not the only US plane at the time either. P-39 & P-40 have to be figured in. Sorry not wrong.
     
  4. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    My point is that the Japanese planes were proved inferior over time because more often than not, they filaed tp bting their pilots back home alive. The Japanese lost the air war in the Southwest Pacific between August, 1942, and March, 1942, a period of about eight months. This was a period during which they had better trained, more experienced pilots, and parity in numbers of aircraft. If their aircraft hadn't been markedly inferior, they wouldn't have lost so quickly.

    Now, you may be able to cite certain paper specifications relative to speed, diving ability, roll rate, blah, blah, blah, but that's not superiority in any sense of the word, just attributes that differ. The real measure is which aircraft win the air battles time after time, and eventually win the campaign.
     
  5. chromeboomerang

    chromeboomerang New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    4
    That's a different argument. I believe you meant Aug 42 to Mar 43. That is a different time period to 41-42. Pearl Harbor, & before that Phillipines & Indonesia , the Japanese were successful in air combat. You can't ignore the P-36, Buffaloes & P-40's of that timeframe. In the timeframe you mention, they lost carriers & pilots, as opposed to having crappy A/C. By 43 with the P-38 & Hellcats arrival, it all changed. But again, that's a different argument & a different timeframe.

    Sakai only got alarmed when the P-38 arrived.

    Sakai
    The enemy fighters were P-40s, P-36s, F2s, and even Hurricanes I think. These were the air forces to repel our invasion of Indonesia

    as we pulled out the five P-40s we had seen jumped us. This was my first combat against Americans, and I shot down one. We had destroyed four in the air and thirty-five on the ground. This was my third air victory, and the first American, but not the last.
     
  6. chromeboomerang

    chromeboomerang New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    4
    Sorry, here's the link.

    Sakai


    And another.

    Saburo Sakai, a Japanese Ace, said, "On my first confrontation with the P-38, I was astonished to find an American aircraft that could outrun, outclimb, and outdive our Zero which we thought was the most superior fighter plane in the world. The Lightning's great speed, its sensational high altitude performance, and especially its ability to dive and climb much faster than the Zero presented insuperable problems for our fliers. The P-38 pilots, flying at great height, chose when and where they wanted to fight with disastrous results for our own men. The P-38 boded ill for the future and destroyed the morale of the Zero fighter Pilot."

    Why The P-38?
     
  7. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    Sakai's opinion doesn't change history.

    The Japanese lost the air war in 1942, period. They did so, not because they were outnumbered, nor because their opponents were more experienced, nor because of superior enemy logistics. The lost because the planes they flew were deathtraps and seldom allowed their pilots to survive and fight another day.

    That makes it very difficult to argue that their planes were superior no matter how fast, maneuverable, or fancy they were. Even the old Buffalo was better than the Zero when pilot survivability was considered. And before this attribute is dismissed as being unimportant, recall that by the end of 1942, Japan was already suffering severe attrition of aircraft and pilots specifically because a large number of their best pilots had died flying those "superior" Zeros.
     
  8. chromeboomerang

    chromeboomerang New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    4
    I didn't state that it did. Fact remains the Zero was not an antique in 41 42. & the Frank & George were competitive designs in 44 & 45.
     
  9. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Definitely agree here.
    Not at all sure that I'd agree with that. The Zero was a superb dog fighter however once the US started using energy tactics it lost its edge. It's fragility certainly became a factor here. The Japanese didn't seam to evolve tactically as well. Sakai also commented on how later in the war even very green US pilots worked as a team. Things like the Thatch Weave played to the strong points of US aircraft and the weak points of the Japanese AC. I haven't read of the Japanese doing anything comparable.
    I'd say rather that the Japanese and US aircraft were on a parr. The Buffalo certainly didn't have better pilot survivability when matched against a Zero. At least the variant of the Buffalo that flew in the USN.
    Not to mention other planes. Again almost everyone started the war with a close escort doctrine that turned out not to work. The US changed it's doctrine pretty quickly the Japanese didn't seam to have. As you pointed out earlier the prevelance of radios especially voice ones and the willingness of the US pilots and ships to use them was also a big factor.
     
  10. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,254
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    The Japanese didn't carry parachutes, IIRC. That would give an edge to the US pilot, IMNSHO.
     
  11. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    I have heard this asserted time and again, yet in most Japanese accounts it is claimed that most Japanese pilots DID carry parachutes. And in most pictures of Japanese pilots about to man their aircraft, it appears they are wearing parachutes.

    Do you have any Japanese sources that support your contention?
     
  12. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,254
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    Sorry, not handy. I'll see if I can find them.
     
  13. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    A Zero pilot facing a Buffalo is so much less likely to need a parachute I don't think that's enough. I'm pretty sure that I've read that it was some Japanese pilots in particular fighter pilots who elected not to use parachutes. I'm pretty sure that this was not navy policy. I've also read that they sometimes had radios removed. In both cases weight savings in order to get more out of their planes was the rational. That the latter was practiced shows that the IJN and IJA didn't fully appreciate the benefits of communications although I think I've also read that the Zero produced a lot of EMI which rendered the radio less useful than it might have been.
     
  14. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    I believe you are wrong about the Buffalo's pilot survivability. Check out Brian Cull's book "Buffalo's Over Singapore".

    I don't have it handy, but I believe there is a statement from an Australian pilot who flew Buffalos against the Japanese in the early prat of the war, to the effect that he would much rather be flying a Buffalo than a Zero any day if an adversary managed to put rounds into his plane.

    Buffalos were shot down time and again and their pilots survived; that was NOT very common with the Zero.
     
  15. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    I think it's pretty well documented that Japanese pilots often had the radios removed from their planes due to the general unreliability of the electronics and the need to reduce weight. Light weight was crtical to the performance of the Zero.

    That fact hampered teamwork and made ground direction impossible.

    The parachute issue I'm not so sure of. If anything that was probably more of a personal decision, and I have never seen any evidence that a significant number of Japanese pilots preferred to fly without parachutes.
     
  16. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    I can readily believe that. Better chance of the plane staying in the air and if it doesn't better chance of getting out alive. Even if it does go down if it stays up just a bit longer it increases the pilots survival probability as there were large areas in the Pacific where bailing out likely meant a slow death rather than a quick one.
    The problem is Buffalos didn't shoot down many Zeros. Depends a lot on what the probabilities are.
     
  17. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    It may even have been mission dependent. Given their feelings about being captured a pilot flying CAP might well choose to wear a chute while the same pilot on a strike might not. I think Sakai may have said something about this but I read his Caiden ghost written book so long ago it's a bit vague.
     
  18. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    If I am not mistaken Tarawa was a land battle and therefore beings airplanes on neither side, except for the Corsair, were equipped with bayonets this thread has gotten way off topic.

    Brad
     
    luketdrifter likes this.
  19. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Yep. If any want to continue the parachute and radio themes we should continue on a new thread or take a look at:
    Optional parachutes and radios?
    where there have been a couple of good replies.

    At the time of Tarawa it would have been F4Fs and SBDs for the Marines wouldn't it?
     
    formerjughead and luketdrifter like this.
  20. luketdrifter

    luketdrifter Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    2,349
    Likes Received:
    304
    The talk kind of drifted off Tarawa there...I'm by no means as knowledgeable in Japanese aircraft or tactics as you two are...but I don't think the US got "lucky" in the sense they loped into a victory. The US was lucky that the Japanese thought there were unbeatable and that they had total disreguard for the American Marine as a fighting force. Still believing in the divine destiny of the Empire and refusing to change up tactics and advance technology is what brought them down in the long run. The US got better, smarter, faster, stronger, more technological every month while Japan withered on the vine.
     

Share This Page