PDA

View Full Version : PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat Quiz Thread......



Pages : [1] 2

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 08:39 AM
Hi All;

In another forum I frequent they run threads in each specific area that seem to be quite popular. The Forum area the limiting factor for the discussion, and it played much like a game. It looks like a lot of fun, plus (heaven forbid) folks seem to learn from them so what say we give it a roll.

PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat Quiz Thread......RULES:
1. All questions will only pertain to Pacific/S.E.Area Theatre of operations in WWII and prior (1931-1945).
2. All questions must be limited to AirCombat, the Aircraft, Units, Personnel, Actions, Tactics, Markings, Ordinance, Bases, etc..
3. The current winner will post a question, anyone may try and answer it, yet the question poster will announce who came up with the correct answer first, then pass the thread off to that winner, hopefully elaborating on any additional info.
4. The new winner MUST post within 48 hours their new question or it reverts back to the previous.
5. If the answer is not given in 96 hours, the one posing it may answer and post another or let it continue on if it is gaining responses.
6. The one posing the question is welcome to post as many hints as they feel is needed as it moves along.

The point is NOT so much to come up with rediculously difficult or complex questions, yet to build a very large thread wherein trivia of PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat can be discussed inspiring further investigation...

The next two posts will give an example then I'll post the lead question. Good Luck! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 08:39 AM
Hi All;

In another forum I frequent they run threads in each specific area that seem to be quite popular. The Forum area the limiting factor for the discussion, and it played much like a game. It looks like a lot of fun, plus (heaven forbid) folks seem to learn from them so what say we give it a roll.

PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat Quiz Thread......RULES:
1. All questions will only pertain to Pacific/S.E.Area Theatre of operations in WWII and prior (1931-1945).
2. All questions must be limited to AirCombat, the Aircraft, Units, Personnel, Actions, Tactics, Markings, Ordinance, Bases, etc..
3. The current winner will post a question, anyone may try and answer it, yet the question poster will announce who came up with the correct answer first, then pass the thread off to that winner, hopefully elaborating on any additional info.
4. The new winner MUST post within 48 hours their new question or it reverts back to the previous.
5. If the answer is not given in 96 hours, the one posing it may answer and post another or let it continue on if it is gaining responses.
6. The one posing the question is welcome to post as many hints as they feel is needed as it moves along.

The point is NOT so much to come up with rediculously difficult or complex questions, yet to build a very large thread wherein trivia of PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat can be discussed inspiring further investigation...

The next two posts will give an example then I'll post the lead question. Good Luck! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 08:39 AM
Which unit was the first to use the Ki-44 on operations, and what was the locale?

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 08:40 AM
47th Dokuritsu Chutai formed to test the Ki-44 in action November 1941 in Tachikawa from personnel of the of the Flight Test Center flying prototype and pre-production aircraft.....Also known as the Shinsengumi (Silverberry perhaps?) or Kawasemi (Kingfisher) Unit eventually becoming the 47th Hikousentai.

Bases list as;
Tachikawa Nov-Dec.1941
Saigon & Bangkok Dec. 1941
Kuantan, Malaya Jan.-Mar. 1942
Then Burma and on.

From Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and their Aces 1931-1945, by Hata-Izawa-Shores, ISBN1-902304-89-6

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/47th.jpg

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 09:08 AM
First PTO/S.E. Asia WWII AirCombat Quiz Thread Question:

The Ki-61-I series made significant changes to the design with the "1d" or Kai/Tei including lengthening of the tail for balance due to a lengthened out nose.

"What would be the primary reason the portion forward of the cockpit lengthened roughly 120mm and would be retained on all future versions?"

Vacillator
09-20-2006, 09:39 AM
My guess (and that's all it is http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

20mm cannons in the nose? Or maybe less specific i.e. nose mounted cannons...

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 10:04 AM
Correct, you win Vacillator.......Your turn.

Though other items behind the ammo stores aided in the lengthening change (such as a larger oil tank in the cockpit, longer guns and so on), the Ho-5 20mmx94 rounds were significantly larger then the previous H0-103 12.7x81SRmm rounds. The wider ammo cans forcing the engine forward.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2aircart1.jpg

Vacillator
09-20-2006, 10:15 AM
Second question:

US navy fighter designations usually carried the F prefix, followed by a unique number, followed by a letter denoting the manufacturer.

This system was not adhered to when it came to Wildcats and Corsairs. Why?

joeap
09-20-2006, 01:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vacillator:
Second question:

US navy fighter designations usually carried the F prefix, followed by a unique number, followed by a letter denoting the manufacturer.

This system was not adhered to when it came to Wildcats and Corsairs. Why? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because they were made by different manufacturers?

berg417448
09-20-2006, 02:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vacillator:
Second question:

US navy fighter designations usually carried the F prefix, followed by a unique number, followed by a letter denoting the manufacturer.

This system was not adhered to when it came to Wildcats and Corsairs. Why? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because they were made by different manufacturers? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Wildcats and Corsairs made by other manufacturers still adhered to that designation system. . For example, the Chance-Vought F4U Corsair was also made by Goodyear...those Corsairs were designated FG by that system.

US Navy designation system explained:

"Before the adoption of the Tri-Service system in 1962, the US Navy had its own system of aircraft designations, completely different from that used by the USAAF and USAF. This system consisted of up to five parts:
(1) One or two letters to indicate the function. These included:

A = Attack
BF = Fighter-bomber
F = Fighter
HC = Transport helicopter
HO = Observation helicopter
HU = Utility helicopter
J = Utility
N = Trainer
O = Observation
P = Patrol
PB = Patrol bomber
R = Transport
SB = Scout bomber
T = Trainer
TB = Torpedo bomber
W = Early warning

(2) A sequence number, to distinguish between aircraft of the same function built by the same manufacturer. The number was left out if it was 1.

(3) A letter to indicate the manufacturer. Because the US Navy used aircraft from considerably more than 26 different manufacturers, most of the letters of the alphabet were shared between several companies. The same company also frequently used more than one letter at various times. If the same aircraft was built by more than one firm, the designation was changed to reflect the individual manufacturers. For example, the Chance-Vought F4U Corsair was also built by Goodyear, whose Corsairs were designated FG. Some of the most important manufacturers were:

A = Brewster, Noorduyn
B = Beech, Boeing, Vertol
C = Cessna, Curtiss, de Havilland Canada
D = Douglas, McDonnell
E = Cessna, Piper
F = Fairchild, Grumman
G = Goodyear
H = McDonnell
J = North American
K = Fairchild, Kaman
L = Bell
M = Bell, Martin, General Motors
O = Lockheed, Piper
P = Piasecki
Q = Fairchild
S = Sikorsky, Stearman
T = Northrop
U = Chance-Vought
V = Lockheed, Vultee
W = Wright
Y = Consolidated, Convair

(4) After a dash, a number to indicate a subtype.
(5) Optionally, a letter to indicate a minor variation on a subtype.

For example, the F4U was the fourth fighter designed by Chance-Vought for the US Navy. The F4U-1A was a modified version of the first subtype of the F4U."

Vacillator
09-20-2006, 03:09 PM
Nice info Berg.
So you're saying the Wildcat F4F was the fourth fighter designed by Grumman, while the Corsair F4U was the fourth fighter designed by Chance-Vought? For a totally different aircraft, why not use another number?

berg417448
09-20-2006, 03:15 PM
You'll have to ask the US Navy that one...but yes. F4F was Grumman's 4th fighter and F4U was Chance-Vought's 4th fighter.

There were others.. F7F Tigercat and F7U Cutlass

LEBillfish
09-20-2006, 03:41 PM
So do we have a winner or Vacillator? You need to pass it off if correct or point out the error in his response please http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Vacillator
09-21-2006, 01:55 AM
Ooops, sorry - I went to bed. The notes on designation are good enough for me, although as Berg says maybe only the US Navy can give a full answer to the use of the same number. To be honest I haven't really heard a plausible reason so if anyone else can chime in that'd be great.

Next time I'll ask a more straightforward question that I can give a black and white answer to.

So it's over to you Berg, hope you haven't gone to bed now...

Tater-SW-
09-21-2006, 08:04 AM
Yes, the system was used as designed and described by berg. It has to do with the way BuAir dealt with Navy contracts. So technically your question, "This system was not adhered to when it came to Wildcats and Corsairs. Why?" was wrong, it WAS adhered to, exactly.

tater

berg417448
09-21-2006, 08:24 AM
Ok...one that probably isn't that hard:

Who was the first ace for the US Army Air corps in the Pacific?

And one that I don't know the answer to...who was the first Japanese ace of WWII?

Vacillator
09-21-2006, 08:25 AM
Oops again, my bad. Apologies for that, but at least I've learnt something, which was one of Billfish's admirable goals.

Says he crawling back under his rock...

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 08:52 AM
No problem Vacillator as this is a new game to here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.......What we do want to do though is the following;

1. Ask only questions you know the answers to, that will save on debates and mis-information if no one else knows.

2. Check your sources, then find others that corroborate the information, that way you can be more assured of your answer.

3. The one posing the question needs to be the one to confirm the answer or dispute it, though try and add even more info to either reply.

Point here is not to show who knows more, or who has more facts at their disposal or make long discussions.............Its simply a "trivial pursuit" sort of game that forces everyone to dig a little for the info, yet in the end learning more and more about all of it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 09:53 AM
First Ace officially attached to the U.S. Armed Forces:
1st Lt. Boyd D. 'Buzz' Wagner, 17th Pursuit Squadron, December 17th, 1941 5th kill, all planes A6M2's taken with a P40(version unknown to me)

http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/0996valor.asp

http://www.acepilots.com/pto/wagner.html

http://www.aviation-history.com/airmen/philippine.htm

First Japanese "Army" Ace:
Lt. Kosuke Kawahara, 64th Hikousentai/1st Chutai, March 8th, 1938, flying a Kawasaki Ki-10, I-15 killed plane. First four kills not described.
from Japanese Army Air Force Aces, 1937-1945 by H. Sakaida

First Japanese "Navy" Ace:
W.O. Kiyoto Koga, 13th Air Group, Nov. 24th, 1937, Flying an A5M type 96 Claude, first 4 kills Curtis Hawks, 5th kill an I-16 over Nanking.
from Imperial Japanese Navy Aces, 1937-1945, by H. Sakaida


However know these may not be the first aces of the era. There were many mercenary units hired by warlords to fly for the CAF. In kind, earlier air combats are listed back further for both sides in the area, yet I have little info on those and most encounters seem minimal except for Japanese losses. So it is possible CAF & Mercenary claims as well as Japanese may exist earlier then the dates above.

leitmotiv
09-21-2006, 10:17 AM
Billfish gets the prize for knowing the Japanese count the start of WWII from the 1937 "Intervention" in China.

berg417448
09-21-2006, 10:27 AM
Billfish for the win!

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 10:46 AM
Though Japanese Army unit insignia seemed simply to be artistic graphics, quite often, in fact more often then not they had actual meaning that would allow anyone to know the unit the plane was with. Applying an artistic flair to even the most mundane of symbols, what unit would the last telltale be of, and how would we know that (how is it presented) and also one of the others. (feel free to "save picture as", edit to show what you mean and repost)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/23.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/26.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/51.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/52.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/53.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/61.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/67.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/68.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/78.jpg actually thishttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/78F.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/248.jpg

Telltales from "Emblems of the Rising Sun, Imperial Japanese Army Air Force Unit Markings by Peter Scott, ISBN1-902109-55-4"

Hints to the above (assuming few here are learning to read Japanese)......

The Japanese use Kanji, Katakana, Hiragana, Romanji (letters like we see here)....and quite often Hindu-Arabic numerals along with Kanji to represent numbers. "Some" of the above telltales you will need to know the kanji for number 1, 2 & 8 found here:
http://www.kanjisite.com/html/start/jlpt/4/steps/lhs4kstep1.html

triad773
09-21-2006, 10:59 AM
Looks cool LeBillFish! Enough to kindle some interest (more) in Japanese planes. Have a freind from there and for thier birthday I fashioned a small marble plaque with thier surname in Japanese. Translated, it meant "Pine Tree by Rice Paddy," but in English it read "Matsuda."

Thanks

Triad

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 11:42 AM
Another hint...........

don't over think it, look for numbers in the shapes.

Cadet_Bobo
09-21-2006, 12:59 PM
It's the 248, Boomerang device shows at the point of boomerang. 2, 4 then 8. Very clever. Also shown is the 23rd (top left) an obvious 23 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (top right) 26, two strikes and a abstract 6, could have been 62 also...but is 26. (second row right) 53 is neat, 5 on left side of figure 3 on right. Also, 61, big 6, inclined 1,...51, more abstract but same idea as 61....52,even a bit more abstract....67 and 68 design following. Facinating stuff.

Bobo

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 01:11 PM
Cadet Bobo has it....your turn http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/23.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/23a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/26.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/26a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/51.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/51a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/52.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/52a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/53.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/53a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/61.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/61a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/67.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/67a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/68.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/68a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/78.jpg actually thishttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/78F.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/78a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/248.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/248a.jpg

Cadet_Bobo
09-21-2006, 01:26 PM
Thanks Mrs. Fish! Since I don't know anything you all don't know, here's an easy one. But just maybe someone doesn't know, and now he/she will when answered correctly:
What brave airman single-handedly sunk the Akagi.
(hint): He's American http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Easy I know...hehehe

Bobo

LEBillfish
09-21-2006, 01:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cadet_Bobo:
Thanks Mrs. Fish! Since I don't know anything you all don't know, here's an easy one. But just maybe someone doesn't know, and now he/she will when answered correctly:
What brave airman single-handedly sunk the Akagi.
(hint): He's American http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Easy I know...hehehe

Bobo </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was going to wait and let another post......Yet NO American or plane "sunk" the Akagi.....The Japanese did......Could you rephrase maybe or post another?

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japsh-a/akagi2.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Akagi

Cadet_Bobo
09-21-2006, 01:45 PM
hehehe ok.... what brave aviators bomb caused the eventual scutteling (sp?) of the Akagi??

leitmotiv
09-21-2006, 01:48 PM
He's OK---see SHATTERED SWORD---Richard Best's SBD placed the one grand SAP bomb which caused the fatal fire which gutted the ship---his two wingmen missed, and only his section attacked. The most lethal dive bomb attack of the war.

Cadet_Bobo
09-21-2006, 01:58 PM
That's correct leitmotiv!! Winner Winner Winner!!
Lt. Richard Halsey Best is the man responsible for the eventuall scuttling of the Akagi at the Battle of Midway. One of his wingman's bombs near miss caused damage to the rudder and steering mechanism as well, further hampering attempts to save her.

You're up!

Bobo

leitmotiv
09-21-2006, 02:39 PM
In which well-known WWII Pacific naval battle did dive bombers behave unlike dive bombers---much to the surprise of the opposition's fighter pilots? Who was their leader and which ship were they after?

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 08:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
In which well-known WWII Pacific naval battle did dive bombers behave unlike dive bombers---much to the surprise of the opposition's fighter pilots? Who was their leader and which ship were they after? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have a hint please?

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 08:15 AM
You should all be spanked (but you would enjoy it too much):

Walter Lord wrote: "They had no right to win." He defined the battle as an "incredible victory."

NHawk52
09-22-2006, 08:46 AM
Although I'm not familiar with the dive bomber reference, I do know that Walter Lord wrote "Incredible Victory" about the Battle of Midway.

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 08:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
You should all be spanked (but you would enjoy it too much...... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't study Naval activities, in fact, every response I've posted I have had to look up.....This thread is to learn from for me, not teach http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 09:14 AM
Midway is right, NHawk52---you are nearly there!!!!

Maybe the problem is that everybody concentrates on fighters---this is elementary for anybody who has a passing knowledge of the carrier battles. It is also elementary for anybody who has even a passing knowledge of US Navy fighter battles in the Pacific. If you flunk the course---don't blame the professor!!!!

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 10:05 AM
Some of the Vals from the Hiryu dumped their bombs and tried to mix it up with Yorktown's CAP, though they didn't down any.

tater

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 11:23 AM
Have to run:

The complete answer would have been: During the Battle of Midway, the D3A1 "Vals" from the HIRYU air group penetrated the CAP over the carrier YORKTOWN by dogfighting the Wildcats (some still carrying their bombs), much to the surprise of the Wildcats. They then proceeded to execute a textbook dive bomb attack on YORKTOWN which left the ship temporarily dead in the water. The leader of the HIRYU dive bomber squadron was Lt. Michio Kobayashi. See THE FIRST TEAM by Lundstrom for a detailed examination of this classic attack.

You all flunk!

NHawk52
09-22-2006, 11:46 AM
Well, Tater had 2/3 of the complete answer. That ought to rate at least a "C" - a passing grade. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 11:49 AM
Well since lentimov bolted without handing it off giving the answer, what say we pass it on to Tater-SW then.......

Go for it Tater http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 12:03 PM
Some of the most effective bombing of the Japanese homeland was done by B-29s dropping an oft forgotten payload.

What was it?

tater

NHawk52
09-22-2006, 12:05 PM
I'll take a wild guess here: propaganda leaflets?

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 12:10 PM
Nope.

tater

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-22-2006, 12:17 PM
Incendiary bombs.


Or littleboy/fatman.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 12:25 PM
Nope, those aren't often forgotten by people thinking of B-29 missions over Japan. They are in fact the most common images people have of B-29 action.

tater

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 12:36 PM
Either:

(1) sea mines or

(2) high-explosive bombs dropped on Japanese refineries under the guidence of the Eagle radar

berg417448
09-22-2006, 01:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Either:

(1) sea mines or

(2) high-explosive bombs dropped on Japanese refineries under the guidence of the Eagle radar </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm thinking that you got it with the sea mine answer:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/IJO/IJO-5.html

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 01:07 PM
#1. The mining operations around japanese ports, and in the inland sea virtually shut down larger merchant shipping (sank quite a few as well). Themines were very interesting, some with multiple triggers, even counters (blow up the 3d ship to pass over, etc) to avoid sweeping operations.

It's well covered (as an overview) in The Japanese merchant Marine in WW2 by Mark Parillo. It's out of print but not hard to find. Awesome book.

tater

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-22-2006, 01:09 PM
I don't agree with that. It is clear that Littleboy and Fatman were the closers. They were so effective, they ended the war.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 01:11 PM
SOME of the most effective. Not THE most effective. Reread the question.

tater

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 01:28 PM
Next to incinerating the Japanese cities, the most effective operation of the B-29s was sea mining. This is not a matter of opinion but of fact. See any reputable history of B-29 operations in WWII such as Morrison's POINT OF NO RETURN. The B-29s and U.S fleet submarines cut Japan off from supply in 1945.

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 01:31 PM
There were two famous massacres perpetrated on the Japanese by Allied air forces, land and sea, in the Pacific War. One was in 1943 and one was in 1944. What were their names?

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-22-2006, 01:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
SOME of the most effective. Not THE most effective. Reread the question.

tater </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think ur question was to vague then. You should've reworded it maybe.

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 01:58 PM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Just a reminder guys!....It is IMPORTANT that you confirm when someone has guessed something correctly by stating "X" person has it right and that the person who has it right as soon as possible posts their new question to keep things rolling.</span>

Also, the thread is also not for debate, yet to simply pose a question to get people to look for the answer till someone finds it.....

lentimov's question now of <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">There were two famous massacres perpetrated on the Japanese by Allied air forces, land and sea, in the Pacific War. One was in 1943 and one was in 1944. What were their names?</span> is the current question standing.

p.s.....Didn't know that about the sea mining, very interesting I'll look it up some http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 02:10 PM
Would it be the Mariana's Turkey Shoot for 1944(sea) and the raid on Rabaul for 43(land)?

(though Kiska is nagging at me)

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 02:11 PM
What do you mean by "massacre," lietmotiv?

Or are you getting at the Battle of the Bismark Sea, and the Marianas Turkey Shoot?

tater

PS--vvaffenpanzer, my question wasn't the least vague in english, perhaps it is if you are not a native speaker. "Some of" means literally that in english, it is a subset of "all of."

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 02:40 PM
I am from California and I definitely do not speak English. That is l-e-i-t on the name, and B-i-s-m-a-r-c-k, as in the Iron Chancellor. The Bismarck Sea was, indeed, a massacre because the survivors of the sunk ships were machine-gunned and depth-charged by the Allied land air forces. The Marianas Turkey Shoot would qualify as an aerial massacre by the United States Navy aircraft by any definition of the word. Your turn at bat, Tater.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 03:10 PM
Asking the questions (a good one) without looking anything up is as tricky as answering, lol.

Here's a pretty simple one:

What important technique was used on USN CVs to mitigate fires?

tater

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 04:20 PM
"guessing" so don't pass it if even slightly off yet obviously flooding with water from hoses, pushing aircraft overboard, and flooding compartments if below decks.

Past that turning the ship so wind would keep it in place..............All just guesses though.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 04:48 PM
Nope, but you are on the right track.

tater

Capt_Cernal
09-22-2006, 08:16 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gifLESillfish needs to get a life...Oh my God! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

LEBillfish
09-22-2006, 09:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt_Cernal:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gifLESillfish needs to get a life...Oh my God! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have to love those who hate learning and even make alternate nicks so they can post believing unscathed........They make you feel so......

Superior....cha know? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

NHawk52
09-22-2006, 09:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
What important technique was used on USN CVs to mitigate fires? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fires aboard ship in World War II were fought by damage control teams applying water and protein foam. Hand-held CO2 extinguishers were widely used, and overhead water sprinklers were also employed in confined spaces and aircraft carrier hangar decks. Steam smothering systems were available in some ships to handle engine room bilge fires. The emphasis in fire fighting was to attack fires directly with men manning hoses dispensing solid water streams or fog, and this remained the accepted approach during the immediate postwar years. (Ref: http://newton.nap.edu/books/0309057825/html/63.html)

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 11:25 PM
After CV-2 LEXINGTON blew up due to escaped fumes from bomb-fractured aviation gas pipe lines in the Coral Sea battle, the USN started pumping CO2 gas into the fuel lines after shutting them off to prevent a recurrence of this disaster. The Japanese never used this system and this led to the explosive demise of TAIHO and SHOKAKU in the June '44 Marianas battle after they took torpedo hits.

Tater-SW-
09-22-2006, 11:33 PM
leit wins again.

The aviation gas lines were drained, and filled with CO2. That's why the question was specific to CVs.

tater

leitmotiv
09-22-2006, 11:53 PM
Who advocated the formation of aerial suicide units and commanded the first naval unit to use Kamikaze tactics in the Philippines in October 1944? He committed seppuku at war's end.

LEBillfish
09-23-2006, 12:51 AM
Vice-Admiral Takijiro Onishi

http://www.wtj.com/articles/kamikaze/

(because with everyone else asleep I might get one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif)

a sub topic I find actually very positive, and truly showing the value of a soft hand and smile for young men giving their all....

http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,...20902-344136,00.html (http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501020902-344136,00.html)

leitmotiv
09-23-2006, 05:38 AM
100% Correct! Banzai! and over to you, Billfish-Sensei! Cheers, Admiral Ugaki

Fascinating article.

Here is one for you on your favorite:

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/kobayashi_1.htm

LEBillfish
09-23-2006, 09:44 AM
In what offensive was the Ki-43 first used in combat and with what famous units?

NHawk52
09-23-2006, 10:03 AM
The initial production version was designated Army Type 1 Fighter Model 1A and was named Hayabusa (Peregrine Falcon). The Ki-43-1a entered production in April of 1941. It was powered by a Ha-25 Type 99 engine rated at 980 hp for takeoff. This engine was later known as the Ha-35/12 under the unified JAAF/JNAF designation system. The Ki-43-1a was initially fitted with a fixed-pitch, two-bladed wooden propeller which was soon replaced with a two-pitch metal unit. The armament consisted of two 7.7-mm Type 89 machine guns mounted in the upper cowling and synchronized to fire through the propeller arc. There were two attachment points for fuel tanks underneath the wing center section.

The first Ki-43-Ia fighters were delivered to the 59th and 64th Sentais in October of 1941, only eight months after production had begun at Ota.

When war in the Pacific broke out, only 40 Hayabusas had been delivered to combat units, and these were immediately taken to the Malay Peninsula by the 59th and 64th Fighter Groups. The initial combat missions consisted of escorts of Army Type 97 (Mitsubishi Ki-21) bombers in attacks on Hong Kong and Burma. First to face the Hayabusa were the P-40s of the American Volunteer Group and the Brewster Buffaloes of No 67 Fighter Squadron of the Royal Air Force. Japanese military security was sufficiently effective in maintaining a cloak of secrecy over the Type 1 Fighter that its appearance was a complete surprise to the Allies. Early war operations established the Ki-43 as one of the most feared Japanese fighters. Its performance was generally superior to that of most Allied fighters during the first year of the Pacific War. Nevertheless, its Navy contemporary, the Mitsubishi A6M Reisen (Zero Fighter), got more publicity back home in Japan, and the Japanese Army decided to reveal the existence of the Ki-43 to the Japanese public in April of 1942 so that it could get its fair share of recognition.


(Ref: http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki43.html) (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki43.html))

leitmotiv
09-23-2006, 10:03 AM
59 and 64 Sentais in the Malayan Campaign of Dec 1941-Feb 1942.

LEBillfish
09-23-2006, 10:30 AM
Correct NHawk52, your turn............

The first commonly notable battle would be of the Malayan campaign and the "Fall of Singapore". Naturally though alrready an extremely accomplished pilot, Captain Tateo Kato would forever have his legacy attached to the Ki-43 (though his work in a Ki-27 was primary).

In kind, though we currently have 3 versions in the sim, the 1a, 1b, 1c......In reality they were the same plane, virtually all Ki-43-I shipped with 2 12.7mm Ho-103 MG's. Yet due to their being prone to jamming most having one removed in the field and replaced with a Type 89 7.7mm gun. So in actuallity, though all 3 versions might be found in the field, the one we call a 1b would be the most common though the 1c the real configuration.

NHawk52
09-23-2006, 10:35 AM
Not a historian, so another easy one:

What was the first American aircraft to land in Japan after the surrender of August 15, 1945?


Edit: my morning's done and I have to go off to work now. Will check back in about 9 hours - sorry for delay...

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-23-2006, 12:56 PM
B-29

berg417448
09-23-2006, 01:10 PM
P-38

http://www.aerofiles.com/tice.html

NHawk52
09-23-2006, 09:59 PM
On August 25, 1945, a pair of P-38s piloted by Colonel Clay Tice and his wingman were the first American aircraft to land in Japan after the surrender on August 15. They later claimed that this unauthorized landing was due to "engine difficulties", a somewhat suspect explanation.

You're up Berg!

berg417448
09-24-2006, 09:41 AM
Another easy one related to the end of the war.

Hostilities officially ended on August 15th, 1945 but an air combat took place August 18th.

1. What american aircraft type was involved and what was that aircraft's name?
2. What famous Japanese pilot was involved?

KIMURA
09-24-2006, 10:12 AM
Q1: B-32 Dominator (in later sources confused with a B-29)
Q2: Saburo Sakai.

berg417448
09-24-2006, 01:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
Q1: B-32 Dominator (in later sources confused with a B-29)
Q2: Saburo Sakai. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

90% there...got the aircraft's name? (As in the crew applied name)

Tater-SW-
09-24-2006, 02:46 PM
Hobo Queen II (though I'd give the win to Kimura).

tater

berg417448
09-24-2006, 02:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Hobo Queen II (though I'd give the win to Kimura).

tater </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. Over to Kimura.

KIMURA
09-25-2006, 01:01 AM
Thanx tater

Here another easy one:


On that picture U can see a Zero. On that specific a/c there has been a technical feature which was applied
to about 120 a/c. Earlier and later Zeros did not has that feature again. About what feature I'm talking about?
http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/Q1.jpg

LEBillfish
09-25-2006, 06:11 AM
Are you pointing out the lack of the radio antenna mast of an A6M3-22?

JG53Frankyboy
09-25-2006, 06:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Are you pointing out the lack of the radio antenna mast of an A6M3-22? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

look at the ailerons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

page 105 in Mikesh's Zero book http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LEBillfish
09-25-2006, 06:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Are you pointing out the lack of the radio antenna mast of an A6M3-22? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

look at the ailerons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

page 105 in Mikesh's Zero book http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well tell us and join in http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif .......Besides, I don't have that book http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

KIMURA
09-25-2006, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Are you pointing out the lack of the radio antenna mast of an A6M3-22? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

look at the ailerons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

page 105 in Mikesh's Zero book http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Franky got it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

The A6M2 Otsu got an balancing tab to the aileron to decrease stickforces. Clearly to see are the deflected tabs at the pic above. Also compare them to common tabs on the Zero.
That balancing tab worked while moving to the contrair direction of the aileron. The working principle is good shown at FAP-ingame IL-2M3 (or so). But instead of decrease stickforces a flutter of the aileron grew up at higher speeds that finally led to a deadly accident during dive-tests, cost the live of Lt. Shimokawa, CDR of Yokosuka NAG. The program was cancelled and applied to very few examples of the A6M2 Otsu. to fewer a/c than the 120a/c I mentioned above.

LEBillfish
09-25-2006, 11:50 AM
So JG53Frankyboy's turn to post a question then http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Capt_Cernal
09-25-2006, 12:29 PM
LESbillfish = Look at me I'm sooooo smart! You make me want to vomit. If you don't have anything better to do than this you're friggin pathetic............ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Tater-SW-
09-25-2006, 01:07 PM
^^^^Why would you even bother to read this thread? Or perhaps you aren't reading, I guess there is software that will read it to you. Must be hard to use the interweb as an illiterate, capt_cernal, huh?

tater

KIMURA
09-25-2006, 02:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt_Cernal:
LESbillfish = Look at me I'm sooooo smart! You make me want to vomit. If you don't have anything better to do than this you're friggin pathetic............ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL seems someone can not manage that a woman knows more about PTO and aviation than a man. Is that the point, isn't it?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

tigertalon
09-25-2006, 02:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt_Cernal:
LESbillfish = Look at me I'm sooooo smart! You make me want to vomit. If you don't have anything better to do than this you're friggin pathetic............ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And u don't even have balls to post under your original nick.

Troll.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

LEBillfish
09-25-2006, 03:36 PM
Actually he may be right (that I'm so smart that is http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif) in that I essentially NEVER had any education till about 30 years old, couldn't even read or write, knew absolutely nothing......and yet now 11 years later I'm even teaching myself how to read and write Japanese....

Maybe I'm not friggin pathetic, yet a friggin genius! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif But don't feel you need to beat yourself up about it, maybe you're good looking or rich http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JamesBlonde888
09-25-2006, 08:09 PM
Is there a question here or are we just going to can an interesting thread?

LEBillfish
09-25-2006, 08:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
So JG53Frankyboy's turn to post a question then http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

JG53Frankyboy
09-26-2006, 04:15 AM
who flew this plane ?

http://www.franky.fliegerhospital.de/lost%20wing.jpg

KIMURA
09-26-2006, 05:08 AM
That is Kanichi Kashimura€s Type 96, tail code 4-115, during one of several landing attempts at Shanghai on 9th Dec.37. He managed to touch down but somersaulted several times. He left his a/c with not more than a scratch. That missing wing was a result of a midair collision with an unidentified a/c.

JG53Frankyboy
09-26-2006, 05:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
That is Kashimura€s Type 96, tail code 4-115, during one of several landing attempts at Shanghai on 9th Dec.37. He managed to touch down but somersaulted several times. He left his a/c with not more than a scratch. That missing wing was a result of a midair collision with an unidentified a/c. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

correct

KIMURA
09-26-2006, 07:07 AM
Due to include different time zones it seems too slow til the fred starter will judge who won.
Here another easy one:

Q1: name the plane.
Q2: what was changed - what's the difference compared to the original fuselage layout of the Shiden-Kai?


http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/Q2.jpeg

actionhank1786
09-26-2006, 07:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
who flew this plane ?

http://www.franky.fliegerhospital.de/lost%20wing.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My guess was going to be Shaft.
Only that guy could pull that off! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Nice thread Lebillfish.
It's really interesting learing all this info you may never hear about...even if it has a few who aren't "fans" of it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

tigertalon
09-26-2006, 07:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
Q1: name the plane.
Q2: what was changed - regarding the fuselage layout?
Q3: the reason for the change?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. N1K2-J Kawanishi Shiden-KAI
2/3.
Wings were moved lower (reason: eradicating the undercarriage problems
engine moved slightly forward (reason: to cure a centre of gravity problem),
redesigned tail surfaces and revised cowling shape, simplified construction (to reduce weight - about 200kg -, and to reduce nubmer of man-hours needed).

P.S.: BillFish, are u a teacher? If not, would certainly make a hell out of one IMO!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Great thread.

LEBillfish
09-26-2006, 08:34 AM
Kimura, sorry yet it will just have to be slow is my guess in that it is not my thread to judge, yet our thread to play. As long as we're all attentive it should move fine, when we're busy real life then it will simply require patience http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

and no tigertalon, as I said above for all intensive purposes I had absolutely zero education till roughly 30 years old not even able to read or write. What I now know and am able to do a result of a couple years of intensive tutoring and my husband teaching me.

However thank you, very kind of you.

KIMURA
09-26-2006, 02:12 PM
LEBillfish that was some kind of kidding, and not meant THAT serious! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif The tricky thing is as I mentioned above. You US-girls/guys are just having some lag to our early-bird wake up in Europe (lag 7-9 hours or so). And the opposite way while you're awake. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

I think, it will work fine, if the questioner does judge him/herself that his/her question is correctly answered and then hands over the initiative to answerer.
At the German speaking Ubi Hangar-board there's already a 67-page a/c reco fred running that way.

Here the link.

German Hangar - bring me to that Fred (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/797105322/m/4581005414)

KIMURA
09-26-2006, 02:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:
1. N1K2-J Kawanishi Shiden-KAI
2/3.
Wings were moved lower (reason: eradicating the undercarriage problems
engine moved slightly forward (reason: to cure a centre of gravity problem),
redesigned tail surfaces and revised cowling shape, simplified construction (to reduce weight - about 200kg -, and to reduce nubmer of man-hours needed).
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tigertalon, the pic does not showing a N1K2-J Shiden-Kai. That would be tooooooo easy.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

edit: I easy the Qs and cancelled the 3rd part of the question(s).

Tater-SW-
09-26-2006, 03:04 PM
Francillon calls it a N1K2-J.

tater

LEBillfish
09-26-2006, 03:49 PM
Well, it is not an N1K5-J as they never completed it before it was destroyed in an air raid. (and can't translate the FAOW #53 that has this picture fast enough so)....It's also not a N1K2-K Shiden Kai Rensen which was a 2 seat trainer.

So that leaves us with a;
N1K3-J Shiden Kai 1 Model 31
N1K3-A Shiden Kai 2 Model 41 (Carrier Version of above)
N1K4-J Shiden Kai 3 Model 32
N1K4-A Shiden Kai 4 Model 42 (Carrier Version of Above)

Now, I don't see spots for Arrestor Hooks though that little notch under the rudder might be one but I think that's a nav light. So I'll say it knocks out the A versions.

You asked for:
Q1: name the plane.
Q2: what was changed - regarding the fuselage layout?
Q3: the reason for the change?

So the N1K4 was simply a larger H.P. engine, that leaves us with;
Q1: N1K3-J Shiden Kai 1 Model 31
Q2: Engine was moved forward roughly 6" also resulting in room to add 13.2mm guns in the engine cowling.
Q3: Because the N1K2-J Shiden Kai was severely unbalanced from nose to tail.

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/n1k.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/n1k.html)

http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/n1k-j.htm

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/N1K3.jpg

tigertalon
09-26-2006, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
Tigertalon, the pic does not showing a N1K2-J Shiden-Kai. That would be tooooooo easy.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now after reading this thread in its entirety I can say only one thing:

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Tater-SW-
09-26-2006, 04:08 PM
What is going on behind the tailing edge of the wings on the fuselage in that pic? Looks like pitot tubes... radar?

tater

LEBillfish
09-26-2006, 04:21 PM
Probably just steps up onto the wing root yet I'll look into it.

leitmotiv
09-26-2006, 04:31 PM
Those are steps---I am building a Hasegawa Shiden-Kai right now. Crazy about all versions of this airplane.

Have any sources for Kato's gray Ki-10, Billfish? The Fine Molds model just arrived today from Hobby Link Japan and I need info.

LEBillfish
09-26-2006, 10:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Those are steps---I am building a Hasegawa Shiden-Kai right now. Crazy about all versions of this airplane.

Have any sources for Kato's gray Ki-10, Billfish? The Fine Molds model just arrived today from Hobby Link Japan and I need info. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

PM me and let me know exactly what you're looking for.

KIMURA
09-27-2006, 01:12 AM
LEBillfish came close to the thing I wanted to hear, so <span class="ev_code_RED">I hand over the fred to her.</span>(though I'm not fully satisfied, because nobody pointed toward the Model 31 and the resulting Model 32 #517+520.) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Here the thing I wanted to hear about the a/c .

That is #517 as to be seen on the tail code. #517 was, together with #520, basicly a N1K3-J fitted with a Homare 23. That engine featured a new low pressure fuel injection.
Virtually Model 31+32 differed from N1K2-J (Model 21) in a stretched nose by about 150mm(to be seen of the added distance cooling flaps/wing leading edge). The reason to do so was to move the tail-heavy COG more forward for better balance and to boost the armament by adding further 2x 13.2mm Type 3.

Here the difference compared to the Model 21
1.streched nose
2.added slats
3.13.2mm Type 3 gun ports



http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/n1k4-j.JPG

LEBillfish
09-27-2006, 05:12 AM
Japanese Army aircraft carried a number of different types of markings some similar between specific types of planes, within a unit, or utilized upon most if not all aircraft....."What would the type marking called a "senchi hyoushiki" be, upon what aircraft would you find it, and what would it look like?" Since this is an easy question also show a photo or screenshot showing one.

For extra credit describe also the similar marking utilized on civil, experimental & trainer aircraft.

hint: To help out some, here is an excellent version of a translator that translates "romanji" (what we see here) to English or visa versa......"senchi hyoushiki" is two words.

http://dict.regex.info/cgi-bin/j-e/tty/dict

LEBillfish
09-27-2006, 08:17 AM
hint, look here:

http://www.ijaafpics.com/

Look at numerous planes dating from maybe 1940-1944 and beyond though the practice diminished. Earlier, the practice varied in use and style (it actually something else to be told upon confirmation).

You'll see a common feature between many of the planes that might be associated with the translated words....It is a VERY simple marking.

Vacillator
09-27-2006, 10:14 AM
Okay, I've got as far as the combat band or stripe in front of the tail as shown in this photo:

http://www.warbirdpictures.com/ArmyJB&W/Ki-43-3.jpg

White or sometimes red.

As for those on civil, experimental and trainer I'm not sure - were they different colours?

LEBillfish
09-27-2006, 11:29 AM
Good enough Vacillator to pass it on.....All yours......

A "senchi hyoushiki" or Combat Band or Battlefield Insignia, literally translated "(battle)Front Mark", was added to most front line combat aircraft up until 1943 when the practice very slowly began to diminish, my guess often due to time. Simply a white band placed anywhere between the mid fusalage to the tailplanes, position not dictated that I know of...........For the others, red & white bands designated civil or experimental status, a red and yellow band a trainer.

Earlier examples exist, yet quite often you'll see them in chutai colors so as to whether they are "combat bands" or not entails looking at other planes in the unit as often (think Ki-27 or earliest Ki-43's and older) the stripes designated the chutai/shotai and or position within the shotai though could even just be decoration.

A last example would be "Tactical or Command" markings, usually white, or red with a white outline.

KIMURA
09-27-2006, 11:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
hint, look here:

http://www.ijaafpics.com/

Look at numerous planes dating from maybe 1940-1944 and beyond though the practice diminished. Earlier, the practice varied in use and style (it actually something else to be told upon confirmation).

You'll see a common feature between many of the planes that might be associated with the translated words....It is a VERY simple marking. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure I understood the question correctly(english isn't my mother tongue). LEBillfish are U talking about the white surroundings of the Hinomaru?

LEBillfish
09-27-2006, 12:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
I'm not sure I understood the question correctly(english isn't my mother tongue). LEBillfish are U talking about the white surroundings of the Hinomaru? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, the white stripe around the fusalage near the tailplanes....vertical.

Vacillator
09-27-2006, 12:45 PM
Okay, a very easy one as I need to supply the answer this time, unlike my first question http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

Which ship was involved in a totally unexpected attack in the Pacific, and later in the war took 16 torpedo hits (some US and some Japanese) before sinking?

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 12:51 PM
Piece of cake, U.S.S. HORNET CV-8.

Vacillator
09-27-2006, 01:29 PM
Well I did say it was easy. Next time I'll do a bit of digging before answering a question right http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

Over to you leitmotiv.

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 01:42 PM
I'll credit you, Vacillator, that's a tough question---I got it because I remembered the high number of American torps it took to get a hit on her because of duds---something like that sticks in my mind.

OK folks, which two Japanese fighters operated against the Philippines in Dec 1941?

VVaFFenPanZZeR
09-27-2006, 04:00 PM
G3M's, G4M's, and ki-21's

LEBillfish
09-27-2006, 04:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VVaFFenPanZZeR:
G3M's, G4M's, and ki-21's </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Those are all bombers.....

JG53Frankyboy
09-27-2006, 04:21 PM
A6M2 Model 21 & Ki-27

werla
09-27-2006, 04:21 PM
Is it the Ki 27a Nate and the A6M2 Reisen, or is that to easy.

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 05:16 PM
Frankyboy and werla---both right and posted at exactly the same time. Fair is fair---a tie breaker question just for you two: the Japanese Navy air units clobbered the most famous AAF air base in the Far East on the first day of the the war with the Allies (8 Dec local time)---what was its name?

werla
09-27-2006, 05:53 PM
I think its Clark Field.

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 06:13 PM
You win, werla---its your turn at bat!

JG53Frankyboy
09-27-2006, 06:35 PM
anyway, i found a third fighter: the A5M , on board the carrier Ryujo.

werla
09-27-2006, 06:56 PM
Ok, another easy one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

What Japanese aircraft made its combat debut at Midway?

JG53Frankyboy
09-27-2006, 07:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by werla:
Ok, another easy one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

What Japanese aircraft made its combat debut at Midway? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

looking forward to the answer !
because i have absolutly no idea which japanese plane that should be - on the carriers or the cruisers............

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 07:11 PM
The SORYU carried the D4Y1 dive bomber---which was being used as a recon plane. Allied codename: Judy. Japanese name: Suisi.

werla
09-27-2006, 07:25 PM
yes its the D4Y Judy onboard the Soryu.
Its your turn leitmotiv.

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 07:37 PM
OK---what was the name of the luckiest Japanese aircraft carrier of the war which never was damaged until her final battle in which she was sunk? She was in service from 1941 and fought in every major carrier battle but one.

leitmotiv
09-27-2006, 07:54 PM
I deliberately left out the A5Ms because I thought they never actually were employed in the campaign, Frankyboy, but it just hit me they might have been used on the raid on Cavite Naval Yard in 1941. If they were used, I apologize sincerely and humbly for the error.

JG53Frankyboy
09-28-2006, 06:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
OK---what was the name of the luckiest Japanese aircraft carrier of the war which never was damaged until her final battle in which she was sunk? She was in service from 1941 and fought in every major carrier battle but one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it looks like you are meaning the ZUIKAKU, but, actually , she was damaged in the Battle of the phillipines Sea in june 44 before she was sunk in the Philipines operationes in October 44..........

anyway, she was a busy ship !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Zuikaku

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 06:31 AM
Your shot, Frankyboy.

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 07:38 AM
Checked the reliable THE IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY by Watts and Gordon. ZUIKAKU damaged in the Battle of the Philippine Sea in June 1944---the last battle before her demise as part of the sacrificial Ozawa group in October during the Leyte battle. Whoops.

JG53Frankyboy
09-28-2006, 07:58 AM
name the three Zero pilots who performed 6 loops in thight formation over Port Moresby in May 1942. much to the enjoy to the men on the ground, who didnt fire their AAA.

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 08:49 AM
Believe they were Sakai, Nishiwaza, and Ota---Tainan N.A.G., Lae.

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 01:46 PM
That is: N-i-s-h-i-z-a-w-a, Ota, and Sakai---better known as "the clean-up trio." Brain damage. I should avoid posting when beset with allergies.

JG53Frankyboy
09-28-2006, 02:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
That is: N-i-s-h-z-a-w-a, Ota, and Sakai---better known as "the clean-up trio." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

im reading most time Nishizawa, but who cares.

you have it Leitmotiv.

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 03:33 PM
Name the type of aircraft which became the first successful Japanese night fighter, where it had its first successes, and explain an oddity of its armament.

tigertalon
09-28-2006, 04:36 PM
Let me try one more time http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Nakajima J1N1-S Gekko, which was originaly planned and developed as a shore based long rage fighter (J1N1) and was firstly turned into a nightfighter in a J1N1-C Kai version (model 11).

The -S model featured two upward and two downward firing 20mm cannons in the fuselage, but no forward aimed weapons. A number of these planes were fitted with radar and searchlihgt and also aditional 20mm cannon in a nose, while omitting downwards firing guns (and was renamed J1N1-Sa or Model-11a)

The field modified J1N1-C KAI shot down two B-17's of 43rd Bomb Group attacking air bases around Rabaul on May 21, 1943.

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 05:47 PM
A+++++++++++ Over to you, tigertalon!

LEBillfish
09-28-2006, 07:23 PM
Good responses guys, if either the one posing the question or response can elaborate more, with pics, URLs, descriptions, all the better http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

tigertalon
09-28-2006, 07:50 PM
Which Essex class carrier was heavily damaged by a single japanese plane in a non-suicide attack, and which type of plane it was? In one of subversions towards the end of the war this plane type was relegated to a different role, a very unusual one for this kind of plane. Which role it was?

leitmotiv
09-28-2006, 10:58 PM
Great question, tt. I can answer the aircraft part but finding the carrier means digging through THE BIG E and I'm knackered! Good luck everybody!

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 01:13 AM
USS Franklin was hit by a bomb of a Yokosuka D4Y Judy, though other accounts suggest an Aichi D3A.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/USS_Franklin_list-700px.jpg

tigertalon
09-29-2006, 03:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KIMURA:
USS Franklin was hit by a bomb of a Yokosuka D4Y Judy, though other accounts suggest an Aichi D3A.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oops, sorry, I didn't know about the 'Val' suggestions. Otherwise correct answer.

For the second (part of the) question, let's just assume it was indeed a Judy, one of the planes I personally miss the most in PF.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/aegeeaddict/bird2-d4y2.jpg

Vacillator
09-29-2006, 04:13 AM
Late war use included single seat suicide attacker with 800kg of explosives (or so says a book I just looked at).

If that's the answer, please pass the ball to Kimura as he answered the first bit...

whiteladder
09-29-2006, 04:51 AM
or maybe the Yokosuka D4Y2-S Suisei-E which was design as a nightfighter with Fixed forward-firing armament was revised to 2 Ӕ 0.303 inch (7,7 mm) Tyoe 97 guns in the upper nose, and 1 Ӕ 20 mm Type 99 model 2 cannon was installed in the central fuselage to fire obliquely forward and upward in a 30 dgree angle.

Not a great success apparently

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 05:02 AM
Thx TT.

Here another one:

During the action on 4th June 1942 off Midway, that fighter pilot awarded some kind of decoration for engaging a Zero in a head-on pass and shoot it down.

Q.1 name the pilot?
Q.2 name type of a/c he flew during that action?
Q.3 name the award he got for that action.

Vacillator
09-29-2006, 05:26 AM
Kimura

Was it Tom Cheek, F4F, Navy Cross?

http://www.users.bigpond.com/pacificwar/Midway/TomCheek/Wildcat_V_Zero.html

whiteladder
09-29-2006, 05:47 AM
Captain Marion E. Carl

in a Brewster F2A Buffalo

awarded Navy Cross

???

tigertalon
09-29-2006, 07:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by whiteladder:
or maybe the Yokosuka D4Y2-S Suisei-E which was design as a nightfighter with Fixed forward-firing armament was revised to 2 Ӕ 0.303 inch (7,7 mm) Tyoe 97 guns in the upper nose, and 1 Ӕ 20 mm Type 99 model 2 cannon was installed in the central fuselage to fire obliquely forward and upward in a 30 dgree angle.

Not a great success apparently </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the answer I was looking for. Fighter (or night fighter) was a very unusual modification for a plane initially developed as a single engined dive bomber.

Still, Kimura got the first, the harder question right, so I guess it's ok for him to continue.

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 08:07 AM
Whiteladder you're damn close. Marion Carl was in the same unit like that specific pilot, the VMF-221.

WL you got the answer 2 and 3 as correct, but the pilot was not Carl.

Here a drawing of that head-on off Midway. (little hint for the ones who owns that book)
http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/sspz1081.jpg

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 08:45 AM
Obscure question---cover tipped me off---Marine's name was Humberd. Had no idea he received a medal.

LEBillfish
09-29-2006, 09:05 AM
Complete your answers everyone.....he posted the question in 3 parts, sounds like you have all 3 put them together......Also, since it's taking from others give some more info to answer it as fully as possible.

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 09:32 AM
Great, I was in hope Whiteladder would complete before Leitmotiv would finish. What should I do? Whiteladder did solve 2/3 and Leitmotiv 1/3 but with the pilot's name I searched for. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Leitmotiv would U agree to hand over to Whiteladder to bring some change into the fred? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

whiteladder
09-29-2006, 09:39 AM
beet me to it well done, wasn`t sure if it was going to be Humberd or Carl

Just for a bit of extra info...

Statement of Captain William Carter Humberd, USMC:

While in the standby division on morning of June 4, 1942, the air raid alarm sounded at 0559. Our division took off at approximately 0605. In our division of six planes, Capt. Kirk Armistead is division leader, 2nd Lt. William B. Sandoval his wingman, myself section leader of second section with 2nd Lt. William V. Brooks as wingman, 2nd Lt. Charles Murphy Kunz 3rd section leader with 2nd Lt. Martin Edward Mahannah his wingman. We took off immediately after fourth division and started gaining altitude in direction of approaching enemy which was 310 degrees, altitude 12,000 feet given by base radio.

Sight contact was made of enemy formations at approximately 12,000 feet bearing about 30 degrees to port and distance of about 10-15 miles. We continued climbing to 17,000 feet, still keeping the enemy slightly to our port, then when in position of about 3,500 to 4,000 feet above and still to port we made attack, about 30-35 miles bearing 320 degrees from islands.

By time to make attack, my division leaders wingman had dropped back some in which case I was second to attack. I followed division leader in a high side approach shooting down one (1) bomber in this approach, then coming up for high side approach on other side I again attacked, thinking I might have shot down another bomber in this approach. I again attacked, thinking I might have shot down another bomber in this approach. I came up on other side and started another approach when, about half way through run, I heard a loud noise and turning around I saw a large hole in hood of my plane and also two type 00 navy fighters on me about 200 yards eastern, then I immediately pushed over in steep dive in which one (1) followed me. I descended to water level in trying to gain distance on the fighter, the plane staying with me; I stayed at water level with full throttle gaining distance slowly until I decided the distance was great enough to turn on 300 yard distant and the plane caught on fire and out of control dived in the water. By this time I was approximately 40 miles from first attack and started gaining altitude up to 10,000 feet. My fuel and ammunition were fairly low, about three-fourths exhausted, and I called to see if field was clear for landing, in which case I received an "affirmative". In the meantime, while climbing for altitude, I discovered my hydraulic fluid had been lost and my flaps and landing gear would not lower so I used emergency system and the wheels lowered, then made proper approach to field and landed. After refueling and rearming, I again took off and while I knew my wheels would not retract, I intended going some distance from field to remain for a period when orders to land were given to all fighting planes.

My plane was a F2A-3, Bureau Number 01553, loaded with 1300 rounds of .50 cal. Ammunition, one ball, 2 armor piercing. The attack was made at approximately 0625 and I used approximately 400-600 rounds of ammunition; the final landing being about 0745.

The enemy formations were of a Vee consisting of about five to nine planes each, there being about 4 to 5 of such formations in group we attacked. I don't know what formation the fighters used or where they were as the first I knew of their presence was the loud burst in my plane and turning, saw them. The type of bombers seems to correspond to the type 99 Aichi (navy), and the fighters were navy type 00.

After my second approach, I saw about four or five planes going down in flames and only identified one as our own, all this was just a glance on my part. Their fighters seemed to out maneuver us in most all respects except n my case, I out dived the one after me and gained distance at sea-level. Frankly, I think the F2A-3 does not compare with their type 00 fighters whatsoever.

My plane had a number of holes in it, three or four making the left beam tank unusable. Had two large holes in fuselage of what appeared to be 20 mm size. No apparent damage to plane except for left beam tank and hydraulic lines broken.

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 10:02 AM
Take it away, whiteladder!

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 12:09 PM
Here a winner list of the fred. I hope nobody is missed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

1.Vacillator
2.Berg
3.LEBillfish
4.Cadet Bobo
5.Leitmotiv
6.Tater
7.Leitmotiv
8.LEBillfish
9.NHawk52
10.Berg
11.Kimura
12.Frankyboy
13.Kimura
14.LEBillfish
15.Vacillator
16.Leitmotiv
17.Werla
18.Leitmotiv
19.Frankyboy
20.Leitmotiv
21.Tigertalon
22.Kimura
23.Whiteladder
24.Tater

whiteladder
09-29-2006, 12:13 PM
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/9949/imagebx4.jpg

1Name the Ship.

2The Battle.

3Normally wrongly attributed to a certain Photographer listed killed in the explosion. Why can`t this be the case (hint reason is in the the picture).

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 12:28 PM
1. Big-E.

2. Battle of the Eastern Solomons

3. No idea unless the dead photographer was killed by one of the first bombs that hit (smoking hole in background).

tater

whiteladder
09-29-2006, 12:32 PM
we have a winner!!

from the following web site

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-e/cv6-a.htm

According to the original photo caption, this explosion killed the photographer, Photographer's Mate 3rd Class Robert F. Read. However, Morison's "History of U.S. Naval Operations in World War II" (volume 5, page 97) states that Read was killed by the bomb that had earlier hit the after starboard 5"/38 gun gallery, which can be seen burning in the upper left.

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 12:46 PM
What logistical capability did the 5th AF have to create to prosecute the war in the SWPA?

tater

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 12:56 PM
Supply flights over the Himalaya Mountains---the Hump.

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 01:08 PM
5th AF. Hump was the 10th AF and 14th AF.

tater

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 01:43 PM
Desperation play---I'm stumped!

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 01:44 PM
Was it supply by parachute in New Guinea?

KIMURA
09-29-2006, 02:52 PM
They started construction of a central depot at Townsville - 4th Air Depot.

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 02:55 PM
Capability. Lietmotiv is on the right track. I'll admit it's hard to word the question properly in a way that isn't too leading. That's what I get for tpying a question 1-handed with a 3 month old in the other (i'm hoping to have him as daddy's wingman within a year or two http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

tater

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 02:57 PM
Stumped. Nothing for it but seppuku at dawn (sigh).

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 04:04 PM
Hint: Why would anyone saw a perfectly good truck in half?

tater

LEBillfish
09-29-2006, 08:36 PM
Much of the supply initially for the 5th A.F., in fact the better food was brought in by bombers called "Fat Cats" often old wrecks no longer good for action, rebuilt and used for the purpose. As crews would rotate out to Australia for leave, they'd fill them up with any supplies needed as everything initially was make shift or scrounged....Truck parts even used to fix P-38's. Quite simply, once out of Port Moresby there were simply no roads and the "Chinese sized" horses few and far between.....Lack of 4 wheel drive vehicles though even doubting they would make it made flying in supplies mandatory. However, even cargo type planes were in limited supply.

Though I have no info on a cut in half truck on hand, I do know that initially the collection of vehicles the 5th AF bomber units had simply could not do the job, a 4 wheel drive vehicle needed. None of these even though lacking could they get to the forward bases.

I would "guess" the solution simple......dismantle a truck for the important parts, and cut the body and frame in two welding it back together later.

Tater-SW-
09-29-2006, 09:41 PM
lebillfish, i'll give it to you so the thread doesn't languish during weekend family time.

It was a poorly worded question, I'll admit.

The 5th AF had no roads to work with most of the time. Most of the strongpoints they simply bypassed. They learned quickly how to completely supply their units from the air, an impressive task for bomber units that need lots of, well, everything.

They'd get locals (paid) to clear a flat bit (with the help of troops who hoofed it in), then land C-47s with engineers and turn it into an airfield. The "cut trucks" bit was to get them to fit inside a C-47! They could get a jeep in or out in under 1.5 minutes or something like that. Trucks were just too big. So they cut one in half, and put the 2 parts in different planes, then bolted it back together after they moved them. It worked so well from that point on, they cut all new trucks in half and rebuilt them with bolts for easier disassembly.

I think this happened at Tsilli Tsilli (Nazdab?) but they were giving a brass hat flight to some visiting general, and when they flew low, he saw all the trucks and commented on how fast they had gotten the road built to the coast. Kenney replied that there was no road to the coast and the guy was shocked, he couldn't figure out how trucks got there except by ship, then road.

So the answer is air supply for the logistical train---very similar to the hump operations. Given their abysmal resources, it really shows what can be done.

tater

leitmotiv
09-29-2006, 11:11 PM
Well, stonk me with a stick of 1000-lb HE and clear the rubble with daisy cutters!

LEBillfish
09-30-2006, 08:52 AM
In Dennis Rodman's A War of Their Own (pdf) (http://aupress.au.af.mil/Books/Rodman/rodman.pdf) , it is discussed how critical it was to cut the shipping supply line to New Guinea to win the war there. Many methods for every aircraft including B17's were developed for both high and low altitude attacks.....and though "skip bombing" was well used,

"What was a "Masthead" type of attack, and how and why did it vairy"?

(feel free to paste here any drawings you can cut and paste to answer)

KIMURA
09-30-2006, 02:16 PM
Surely not the complete answer because I got no clue what's meant with "vairy"

"Masthead" type of attack: (after my understanding)Is an attack with medium bombers with bombs+guns. The bomb run is flown below the ship targets masthead height within the direct target area.

leitmotiv
09-30-2006, 02:29 PM
She meant "vary," Kimura. Masthead is lobbing ordnance directly (hopefully) into the enemy ship out of a low, hozizontal bomb run. I know zipsville about the details of the 5th AF's methods, though.

LEBillfish
09-30-2006, 03:14 PM
Guys, I supplied a link to a PDF you can KEEP!....Look it up http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

leitmotiv
09-30-2006, 05:00 PM
I know, but I have a deskload of manuscripts to read. C'est la vie!

LEBillfish
10-01-2006, 01:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
In Dennis Rodman's A War of Their Own (pdf) (http://aupress.au.af.mil/Books/Rodman/rodman.pdf) , it is discussed how critical it was to cut the shipping supply line to New Guinea to win the war there. Many methods for every aircraft including B17's were developed for both high and low altitude attacks.....and though "skip bombing" was well used,

"What was a "Masthead" type of attack, and how and why did it vairy"?

(feel free to paste here any drawings you can cut and paste to answer) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Failure to answer this question correctly due to the answer having already been supplied in the contained PDF will result in the loss of your PF disk......

Bump

LEBillfish
10-01-2006, 11:03 AM
c'monnnnnnnn.....some of you need to kill the google.....two people to post "Uncle" after this post and we'll move on. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 12:45 PM
OK OK OK---reading it on the fly---can't afford to lose my PF disk---I'd go nuts!

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 12:51 PM
Ye cats!!!! 100 Pages!!!! OK OK OK!!!! Does look excellent----------

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 01:17 PM
Answer coming up. Finally found out the real reason for Kenneth Walker's demise! Fascinating!

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 01:32 PM
The complete answer is on pages 84-88, including a diagram. Coming...

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 01:45 PM
OK, to summarize: skip bpmbing involved literally skipping the bomb along the sea to the side of the target ship. This was found to be inefficent because the bombs lost momentum and also could hit at an oblique angle which would cause them to fail to penetrate the target ship. Masthead bombing was inspired by RAF practice, and it involved a high speed approach with the object of releasing at low (but not wave top) altitude to allow the bomb's weight and velocity to carry it through the hull of the ship---the bomb was not skipped, nor was it launched with the intention of getting a deck hit---masthead bombing aspired to use the bomb like a naval artillery shell to smash through the side of the ship in order to get a maximum-effectiveness delay burst in the guts of the ship. There were three different methods used depending on the type of ship: unarmored, lightly protected, and armored (see Figure 11 on page 86).

OK, teacher, can I go out and play now??????

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 01:49 PM
P.S. The book is fascinating, wonderfully researched, and of tremendous value to PF players---every ship killer fiend should read it!!!!!! I learned a great deal---which I will put into action later---ARG!

LEBillfish
10-01-2006, 02:21 PM
"leitmotiv the lazy" FTW........Take it away leitmotiv, now that wasn't so bad was it?


p.s.......You all are REALLY missing out if you don't have that book....It's a free PDF sponsored on numerous military base sites and at the link above....It's just 1 click away http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 03:37 PM
Piece of cake---lazy---yes.

OK, which wonder weapon was believed by FDR would terrify the Japanese into avoiding war with the U.S., was deployed to the Philippines in 1941, and was not ready for operations when the Japanese struck in Dec 1941? By the way, the expensive forward deployment of this as a "balance of terror" weapon was the biggest proof FDR had no desire for a war with Japan.

horseback
10-01-2006, 03:39 PM
The B-17.

cheers

horseback

werla
10-01-2006, 03:46 PM
Thank you thank you thank you thank you
ttttttthank you (for the pdf link)

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 03:55 PM
The game is afoot!!! Take it away horseback!

LEBillfish
10-01-2006, 05:59 PM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Remember guys, try if you can to elaborate a bit with links, photos, sources, or plain old additional info so we can all learn a bit more about it then just 1 liners http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif</span>

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 08:02 PM
Billfish---I was able to find the Tsushima film and the YAMATO film I was trying to find here, and I found a new Kato film DVD! Let me know if this looks worth getting:

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=TDV-15337D

LEBillfish
10-01-2006, 09:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Billfish---I was able to find the Tsushima film and the YAMATO film I was trying to find here, and I found a new Kato film DVD! Let me know if this looks worth getting:

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=TDV-15337D </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it will be in Japanese most likely but that is probably one of the most sought after films.......I'f you'd dig on seeing Ki-43's slugging it out....real ones, there ya go, I'm gonna get it nice find!!

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 09:58 PM
Ordering now. Tojo

leitmotiv
10-01-2006, 11:48 PM
P.S. If you see any other choice DVDs from this outfit, please let me know. I am looking for an English subtitle version of the notorious film, JUSTICE (2002), about Tojo. Thanks

Vacillator
10-02-2006, 05:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
In Dennis Rodman's A War of Their Own (pdf) (http://aupress.au.af.mil/Books/Rodman/rodman.pdf) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dennis Rodman eh? So much basketball skill and a historian to boot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Great pdf Billfish, thanks.

leitmotiv
10-02-2006, 11:01 AM
Obviously horseback has gone AWOL with a question so I nominate Billfish to ask one to get this show back on the road. P.T. Barnum

LEBillfish
10-02-2006, 12:55 PM
lets give him a while longer.....

LEBillfish
10-02-2006, 03:21 PM
Okie dokie............here we go;

The 14th Hikoudan sent to New Guinea to compliment the 4th Koukuugun's forces of the 6th & 7th Hikoushidans` was primarily built around what two Hikousentai, both the first two to utilize the Ki-61 in combat? (the encounter of Doolittle's flight of a Ki-61 unintentional so not counting).

hint, their first combat assignment was New Britain & New Guinea in mid 1943, also their last the units disbanded almost exactly one year later still in New Guinea in mid 1944.

leitmotiv
10-02-2006, 06:01 PM
68 and 78 Sentais

Ki-61-Ib

JAPANESE AIRCRAFT OF THE PACIFIC WAR, Francillon, pages 114-15

My favorite version---light as a feather.

LEBillfish
10-02-2006, 08:11 PM
Correct, leitmotiv's turn......

the 68 & 78th Hikousentai initially were formed in Manchuria to help defend the Russian border. After being retrained to fly Ki-43 to replace their aging Ki-27 of their old units, they were suprisingly shipped back to Japan to receive the great honor of being the first to train in the Ki-61 & utilize it in field trials.

Each group on the way to New Guinea simply due to problems with the aircraft lost roughly &gt;1/4 of their crews....5th Air Force activity once there keeping their numbers often in the single digits.

Both groups permanently disbanded upon the fall of New Guinea.....

leitmotiv
10-02-2006, 10:45 PM
Let me devote a little thought to this...

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 12:42 AM
Since the G4M "Betty" was completely useless by 1944, and the P1Y Ginga dive/torpedo bomber was not available due to engine problems, the Imperial Japanese Navy did not have a survivable twin-engine torpedo bomber in 1944 until rescued by their worst enemy. Explain:

Tater-SW-
10-03-2006, 08:25 AM
It's a trick question, the Betty wasn't a "survivable" torpedo bomber http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

tater

Tater-SW-
10-03-2006, 08:29 AM
Ki-67 "Peggy", worst enemy, The Imperial Japanese ARMY.

tater

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 08:39 AM
100% Right, tater. Nailed it perfectly. I imagine the Imperial Navy was in agony having to go to the Army hat in hand for the Ki-67. If they had listened to the Mitsubishi engineers who warned them the plan for the G4M was crazy (to demand four-engine performance from a twin), they would not have been so desperate in '44 (Osprey G4M units publication---best book in English on that travesty). Cheers!

LEBillfish
10-03-2006, 09:04 AM
Photo pages to the "Peggy" http://www.ijaafpics.com/jbwki671.htm

Tater-SW-
10-03-2006, 09:22 AM
What made "precision" HE bombing of Japan untenable as a strategy and resulted in the area bombing campaign?

tater

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 10:12 AM
Herf, herf---nature: the jet stream blew the B-29s past their targets so fast the Norden was unable to work properly when they were used dogmatically at high altitude by the true believer Hansell, commander of the 20th AF. LeMay, the greatest AAF bomber tactician, replaced him with orders to go in low and incinerate Japan.

Tater-SW-
10-03-2006, 10:26 AM
Yep, on to you (I threw an easy pitch, I need to be away from the 'puter for a while and didn't want to stall the thread.

leit again...

tater

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 11:47 AM
Which famous carrier battle between the US Navy and the Japanese Navy best epitomizes the meaning of Pyrrhic victory?

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 12:23 PM
Hint


http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/d/d0/300px-USS_Hornet_at_Santa_Cruz-600px.jpg

tigertalon
10-03-2006, 01:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Which famous carrier battle between the US Navy and the Japanese Navy best epitomizes the meaning of Pyrrhic victory? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Battle of Coral Sea?
USN lost Lexington but they sank a light japanese carrier Shoho, and more importantly, they substantially damaged the ships themselves and aircraft power of Zuikaku and Shokaku so they were unable to participate in the great battle of Midway.

NHawk52
10-03-2006, 02:31 PM
How about Santa Cruz in Oct of '42. (thanks for the hint) The Hornet was lost leaving the Enterprize as the last remaining operational carrier in the Pacific Fleet.

"Though tactically Santa Cruz was a draw, strategically it was a narrow victory for the Americans. Nagumo's carriers and Kondo's battleships had been turned away from Guadalcanal, giving the Marines and soldiers there some much needed relief. Perhaps more importantly, the destruction of the best Japanese naval aircrews, begun in earnest at Midway, culminated at Santa Cruz. Though plane losses were high on both sides - 74 American and 92 Japanese - the loss of airmen pointed to a Japanese catastrophe. Nearly 70 Japanese aircrews - including a number of squadron leaders - never returned to their carriers at Santa Cruz, while all but 33 American airmen did.

The first hint of the damage done to Japan's naval airpower was seen the day of the battle, in the feeble afternoon strikes at Hornet. A more telling sign came on November 11, when Enterprise - after quick patching by Sea Bees and the repair ship Vulcan - sortied from Noumea, a full air group on her flight deck, ready to fight. The only Japanese carriers in the area - Hiyo and Junyo, both slow converted ocean liners - were well north of Guadalcanal, carefully staying clear of the American planes there. Without planes and the crews to fly them, the enemy's fleet carriers were impotent. Although Enterprise and her task force faced significant threat from ground-based air forces and submarines, the simple fact was this: 15 days after Santa Cruz, an American carrier stood off the Solomons, battered but ready for action, and not a single enemy carrier came forth to challenge her."

Ref: http://www.cv6.org/1942/santacruz/santacruz.htm

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 04:26 PM
Nice work, NHawk52. Yes, it was Santa Cruz. The Japanese humiliated the USN on American Navy Day, but the victory cost them the remainder of their carrier airmen first team. For them the war was over---all that was left was nearly three years of attrition.

All yours

NHawk52
10-03-2006, 05:32 PM
What was the "Secret" mission assigned the "555" beginning in mid-1945?

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 06:47 PM
Nuke Japan. I couldn't resist---did my grad work on this. Ask another question and I'll let somebody else go for it.

NHawk52
10-03-2006, 07:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Nuke Japan. I couldn't resist---did my grad work on this. Ask another question and I'll let somebody else go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that opens an avenue for some clues: Therein is the one part of "NBC" that wasn't feared. And above would be looking in the wrong compass direction. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LEBillfish
10-03-2006, 08:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NHawk52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Nuke Japan. I couldn't resist---did my grad work on this. Ask another question and I'll let somebody else go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that opens an avenue for some clues: Therein is the one part of "NBC" that wasn't feared. And above would be looking in the wrong compass direction. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

is that a question posed to all playing?

berg417448
10-03-2006, 08:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NHawk52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Nuke Japan. I couldn't resist---did my grad work on this. Ask another question and I'll let somebody else go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that opens an avenue for some clues: Therein is the one part of "NBC" that wasn't feared. And above would be looking in the wrong compass direction. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


555th Parachute Infantry Battalion assigned to combat fires caused by Japanese ballons?

http://www.thedropzone.org/training/smokejmp.html

LEBillfish
10-03-2006, 09:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by berg417448:
555th Parachute Infantry Battalion assigned to combat fires caused by Japanese ballons?

http://www.thedropzone.org/training/smokejmp.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


kewl find here is another http://thezionazireport.org/balloon_bombs.htm

(betting berg gets this one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif)

NHawk52
10-03-2006, 09:42 PM
And a couple more hits for reference:

http://www.triplenickle.com/smjprs.html

http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/fugo.htm (http://www.seanet.com/%7Ejohnco/fugo.htm)

Looks like Berg hit on it first here.

I can only imagine all the sweated brows in DC while they contemplated the chemical and biological implications of these weapons. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Their threat or even their existence was likely one of the few actually well kept "secrets" of the era.

leitmotiv
10-03-2006, 09:50 PM
Brilliant---I thought the 555 was Tibbets' Bomb Group!!!! (It was the 509th Composite Group). Great question! Would never have guessed that in a million years! Completely down in flames!!!!

berg417448
10-03-2006, 10:10 PM
What type of American aircraft was captured and used by the Japanese and was also reportedly involved in a Japanese friendly fire incident in March 1943?

Giganoni
10-03-2006, 11:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by berg417448:
What type of American aircraft was captured and used by the Japanese and was also reportedly involved in a Japanese friendly fire incident in March 1943? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


P-40E. March incident took place around Rangoon.

NHawk52
10-03-2006, 11:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Giganoni:
P-40E. March incident took place around Rangoon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahh. You beat me back. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Here's some text with pics: http://www.j-aircraft.com/captured/capturedby/p40warhawk/captured_p40.htm

LEBillfish
10-04-2006, 07:47 AM
berg can you call a winner?

berg417448
10-04-2006, 08:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Giganoni:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by berg417448:
What type of American aircraft was captured and used by the Japanese and was also reportedly involved in a Japanese friendly fire incident in March 1943? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


P-40E. March incident took place around Rangoon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You got it. Further explanation here:

http://www.j-aircraft.com/captured/capturedby/p40warhawk/captured_p40.htm

Over to you.

Giganoni
10-04-2006, 02:38 PM
Dunno if this has been asked, but, here we go. Not too hard.

Who was the succesor to Yamamoto and in what specific type of aircraft did he "mysteriously" disappear in when trying to reach the Philippines?

NHawk52
10-04-2006, 04:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Giganoni:
Who was the succesor to Yamamoto and in what specific type of aircraft did he "mysteriously" disappear in when trying to reach the Philippines? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Admiral Koga in a Japanese four-engine Kawanishi HSK2 flying boat.

Timeline info: http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/fall/z-plan-1.html

Tater-SW-
10-04-2006, 04:49 PM
That's an H6K ("Mavis").

tater

Giganoni
10-04-2006, 04:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NHawk52:

Admiral Koga in a Japanese four-engine Kawanishi HSK2 flying boat.

Timeline info: http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/fall/z-plan-1.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I believe they mean to say H8K2 (I think HSK2 is a typo on their part), the Emily, but yes that is correct. Can read about the disappearence of Koga and capture of Z plan documents in John Toland's wonderful book The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire, 1936-1945.

NHawk52
10-04-2006, 05:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, I believe they mean to say H8K2 (I think HSK2 is a typo on their part), the Emily </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oops! Guess I just cut and pasted that part without paying attention to that detail. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Next up -- At the request of the Imperial Japanese Navy, for what US plane did a Japanese company actually purchase a manufacturing license, obtain all specifications, and build throughout the Pacific War?

Giganoni
10-04-2006, 05:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NHawk52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, I believe they mean to say H8K2 (I think HSK2 is a typo on their part), the Emily </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oops! Guess I just cut and pasted that part without paying attention to that detail. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Next up -- At the request of the Imperial Japanese Navy, for what US plane did a Japanese company actually purchase a manufacturing license, obtain all specifications, and build throughout the Pacific War? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The DC-3 (C-47), also known as the Tabby or L2D for the Japanese Navy. Probably could have used more of them I'm sure.

Tater-SW-
10-04-2006, 07:03 PM
The picture on the website of the seaplane is of an H6K "Mavis," not an "Emily." H6Ks were far more common anyway.

http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/fall/images/flying-boat-m.jpg


tater

NHawk52
10-04-2006, 09:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Next up -- At the request of the Imperial Japanese Navy, for what US plane did a Japanese company actually purchase a manufacturing license, obtain all specifications, and build throughout the Pacific War? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The DC-3 (C-47), also known as the Tabby or L2D for the Japanese Navy. Probably could have used more of them I'm sure.[/QUOTE]

Bingo! You're up.

Giganoni
10-04-2006, 10:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
The picture on the website of the seaplane is of an H6K "Mavis," not an "Emily." H6Ks were far more common anyway.




tater </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, the picture is of a Mavis, but according to my sources, Koga was in an Emily.

At 2200, Admiral Koga departs Palau by a Kawanishi Type 2 H8K2 Emily flying-boat of the 851st Naval Air Group to establish a new headquarters at Davao, the Philippines. His Chief of Staff, Vice Admiral ***udome Shigeru (former CO of NAGATO) also departs at the same time on board another Emily of the 802nd NAG. Both planes are lost in a typhoon off Cebu, the Philippines. Koga perishes, but ***udome is later rescued by the IJA.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/musashi.htm
I consider this because by 44 the Mavis was in a largely secondary role (production was stopped on the Mavis by 43). If the website meant H6K2, only ten of those were made starting in 1938. It is far more likely that, having learned a lesson from the death of Yamamoto, Koga was in a much more capable H8K2 or H8K2-L.

My question. Japanese servicemen, many pilots, suicide pilots, but also sailors and soldiers had a saying to their fellow men. They talked about a meeting place, should they fall in battle. Where did those many pilots that were lost go to? Where do those that survive go to still, to meet their former comrades?

leitmotiv
10-04-2006, 10:59 PM
Yasukuni Shrine.

Giganoni
10-04-2006, 11:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Yasukuni Shrine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

leitmotiv has the ball now.

leitmotiv
10-05-2006, 12:05 AM
Where was the Ki-44 employed after its debut in Burma in 1942 and before its use in Japan in 1944-45? In which major campaign did it play no role at all?

JG53Frankyboy
10-05-2006, 12:40 AM
Where was the Ki-44 employed after its debut in Burma in 1942 and before its use in Japan in 1944-45?
China and Sumatra


In which major campaign did it play no role at all?
New Guinea

leitmotiv
10-05-2006, 01:43 AM
Er, almost right---missing one.

Vacillator
10-05-2006, 06:40 AM
From a certian website:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki44.html (http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Efbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki44.html)

'In China, Malaya and Burma it was used as a defensive fighter, and in Sumatra it was specifically tasked with the protection of the vital oil fields at Palembang.'

But I think the win goes to Frankyboy...