Miscellaneous Threads pt 2
 
Topics:
first kamikaze mission
Biak Kamikazes?
Mitsubishi Ki 109
Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (New)
Palembang Paratroop Invasion (New)
Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914 (New)
 
first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: Pier Francesco Vaccari <pfvaccari@iol.it>
Date: Wednesday, 13 March 2002, at 9:29 a.m.
 
Someone can confirm me that at 07,30 of 25-10-1944 the first kamikaze attack on CVE SUWANEE (Taffy 1) was conducted by a Ki.84 Hayate of the First Sentai - Fourth Air Army - IJAAF ?
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 13 March 2002, at 2:13 p.m.
 
In Response To: first kamikaze mission (Pier Francesco Vaccari)
 
I think it is safe to say that neither the First Sentai nor any other Army unit flew the first Kamikaze mission. The Army did not join the organized suicide attack effort until it had been unilaterally initiated by the Navy.
 
There was an attack on US CVEs about 0740 on 25 Oct 44. Their attackers were however A6Ms of 201 Naval Air based at Davao, Mindinao. The more famous attack by Lt. Seki took place in the same area later that day.
 
The first "official" Kamikaze attack occurred on 21 October 1944 the day after the tactic had been ordered by Admiral Onishi. Three A6Ms sortied from Cebu. Two returned without having contacted the enemy. The aircraft flown by Lt(j.g.) Kuno did not return. His name was listed in the Japanese press as among those giving their lives in "special attacks" beginning 21st October.
 
No US casualty can be connected to Kuno's death (at least not by me) but what is most interesting is that on the morning of 21 October HMS Australia was heavily damaged and its captain killed when a Japanese aircraft crashed into its bridge. Kuno's sortie did not take place until the afternoon. There is a slight possibility that the Australia attack was part of the organized Kamikaze effort but I have not been able to identify the attacking unit.
 
First Sentai did suffer casualties on Oct 25th but I do not think they had anything to do with suicide attacks.
 
Glad you started this discussion, I'd like to hear from folks who have more information than I do on this
 
Uemura and HMS Australia?
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 13 March 2002, at 2:26 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (richard dunn)
 
Anyone know the circumstances of the loss of Ens. Mahisa Uemura of 201 Air on 21 Oct 44. Might he have crashed Australia?
 
Re: HMAS Australia - first and most Kamikaze hits *PIC*
 
Posted By: Garth <garth.o'connell@awm.gov.au>
Date: Wednesday, 13 March 2002, at 6:50 p.m.
 
In Response To: Uemura and HMS Australia? (richard dunn)
 
Here's just a little snippet from the Australian 'side' of the story. P.S. Richard, Aussie ships have HMAS - His Majesty's Australian Ship, not HMS. :-)
 
Source: "A Chronology of Australian Armed Forces at War, 1939-1945". Bruce T. Swain, (2001). ISBN 1 86508 352 6
Page 318
 
21 October 1944.
 
"Leyte Gulf: At 6:05am a Japanese 'Val' dive-bomber, after being damaged by AA fire from HMAS Shropshire, crashed into the foremast of HMAS Australia. There was a large explosion and an intense fire was started in the Air Defence Position and bridge.
 
The Type 273 Radar latern fell onto the compass platform, both high-angle directors and the director-control tower were put out of action, and the port strut of the foremast was broken.
 
The fire was brought under control very quickly and by 6:35am the large quantity of wreckage on the compass platform and the ADP had been cleared away.
 
Capt. Dechanineux and 21 others were killed or died of injuries, and 64 men were injured - 26 of them seriously. Commodore Collins was among the injured. The Staff Officer (Operations) and the commodore's staff transferred to HMAS Shropshire and Australia, escorted by HMAS Warramunga, headed for Manus Island".
 
The HMAS AUSTRALIA, later was attacked and hit again FIVE times by Kamikaze aircraft in 1944-1945 - attaining the uneviable record surviving the most number of Kamikaze strikes on any one ship during the Second World War.
 
Captain (Capt) Emile Frank Verlaine Dechaineux "Dishy", was a graduate of the Royal Australian Naval College in 1919, he had periods of service with both the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and the Royal Navy (RN) prior to and during the Second World War. While with the RN he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC) for destroying German E-boats after Dunkirk. Returning to Australia he took part in the Gasmata bombardment while comanding officer of HMAS Warramunga.
 
In March 1944 he assumed command of HMAS Australia and took part in the Hollandia landings and the bombardment of Wakde and Aitape, and the landings at Biak, Noemfoor and Morotai. Capt Dechaineux died of wounds received during the battle of Leyte Gulf in the Philippines on the 21 October 1944 when a Japanese Kamikaze aircraft struck the ship's foremast resulting in fires on the bridge. Capt Dechaineux was posthumously awarded the American Legion of Merit in the Degree of Officer.
 
More recently, in 1990, it was announced that a Collins Class submarine to be built at the Australian Submarine Corporation in South Australia was to be named HMAS Dechaineux.
 
Image:
Negative Number: 107000
Caption: Lingayen Gulf, Philippines, 1945-01-09. HMAS Australia showing damage incurred from attacks by Japanese Kamikaze aircraft in Lingayen Gulf during the Luzon campaign. This photograph was taken from the USS West Virginia. (US National Archives Neg. No BB48-0272)
 
Australian War Memorial photographic collection.
 
Editors note: Picture at http://anzac.mdsnews.com/attachments/kkoori/107000-australia.jpg
 
Re: HMAS Australia - first and most Kamikaze hits
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 13 March 2002, at 7:02 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: HMAS Australia - first and most Kamikaze hits *PIC* (Garth)
 
The various sources I've read about this incident are quite uncertain about the aircraft type involved. While dive bombers (or Vals) are sometimes mentioned this does not seem to be the majority opinion. "Vals" also raises the question what Val unit? I can't identify any Val unit in the P.I. as early as 21 Oct. Maybe Army Ki 51s? Other observors were of the opinion that the crash came from a deliberate act.
 
6th FB attacks HMS Australia?
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 6:00 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: HMAS Australia - first and most Kamikaze hits *PIC* (Garth)
 
It is good that we are on the Japanese Army air board! I think I may have found a clue as to HMS Australia's attackers!
 
The Ki 51's of the JAAF 6th Flying Brigade were active in shipping attacks that day. I haven't related their bases to Australia's position or reviewed the documentation on the Australia attack but here's what I have at the moment.
 
Six 65 FR aircraft flew from San Jose and claim to have set a "transport ship" on fire. Three aircraft failed to return and two or three of the others were damaged with one crewman killed.
 
Three others of the 65th flew from Lipa. Results of mission unknown. One failed to return.
 
Three from 66th FR "set an 8,000 ton transport on fire." Two aircraft failed to return.
 
While not very specific the above gives us aircraft with fixed landing gear (and a superficial resemblance to a Val) claiming to attack and set fire to a large ship on October 21st in the P.I. Not conclusive I realize but something to work with
 
65th sentai insignia?
 
Posted By: Ryan Boerema <ryann1k2j@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 12:20 p.m.
 
In Response To: 6th FB attacks HMS Australia? (richard dunn)
 
Anyone know what it was? Scott's "Emblems of the Rising Sun" show the 65th flying "Marys" until '42, with a divided horizontal diamond as the emblem, and an Oscar with a, well, curly, insignia in 1945, but nothing for the "Sonias" mentioned by Mr. Dunn above. (I'll bet these aircraft have a lot of interesting history.)
 
Re: Fixed undercarriage confusion
 
Posted By: Garth <garth.o'connell@awm.gov.au>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 7:06 p.m.
 
In Response To: 6th FB attacks HMS Australia? (richard dunn)
 
I can easily see how our guys could of confused the Ki-51 SONIA and D3A VAL to be the first Kamikaze attack of the Second World War and on the HMAS Australia.
 
This is a very interesting matter for me personally, it could literally involve re-writing the Australian account of this historically significant attack. I am very keen to hear of any more evidence from yourself and our esteemed friends here backing or disclaiming Ki-51 SONIA's of the 6th Flying Group :-)
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: Pier Francesco Vaccari <pfvaccari@iol.it>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 1:14 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (richard dunn)
 
thank you for your reply, but in E.P.Hyot book 'KAMIKAZE' is reported that First Sentai carried out a suicide attack on Taffy 1 group at 07,40 AM, with damage on CVEs SANTEE and SUWANEE.
At 10,50 AM 5 A6M2/5 from Mabalacat (201° Kokutai) carried out an attack on Taffy 3 and CVE ST.LO sunk: I d'nt understand why in every study on Pacific War is reported that the first organized kamikaze attack was conducted by Yukio Seki at 10,50 on Taffy 3.
 
Hoyt as authority?
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 5:43 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (Pier Francesco Vaccari)
 
I certainly admire the quantity of Edwin Hoyt's books. He has written broadly on the Pacific War. Depth and accuracy are another question. When it comes to Japanese sources he seems to rely almost exclusively on secondary sources and these seem often to include popular literature rather than scholarly works.
 
With respect to the 1st Sentai I can only say they were in the P.I. in late October operating from Mabalacat/Clark and later from a base on Negros I. I don't know exactly what they were doing on the 25th but as indicated previously there is no reason to believe they were operating as Kamikazes. {We've had "proving a negative" discussions previously on this board}.
 
We do know that 201 Ku launched two flights of Kamikazes from Davao consisting of a total of 6 A6M Kamikazes and 4 A6M escorts. Take off time was 0630. This fits nicely with a 0740 attack. Three of the Kamikazes did not return to Davao. Most likely explanation is that they attacked CVEs.
 
US intelligence reports for the 25th say the attacking aircraft were thought to be Zeros. The wreckage of one of the attackers was positively identified as a Zero.
 
Don't know where Hoyt got his information. Perhaps he mistook Kantai for Sentai. Through most of October 44 the Navy's 1st Air Fleet was in overall command of Navy air units in the P.I.
 
Can anyone help us with the activities of 1st Sentai on October 25th?
 
Re: Hoyt as authority?
 
Posted By: Larry <Hldeziv@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 7:11 a.m.
 
In Response To: Hoyt as authority? (richard dunn)
 
I can't add much to Rick's take on this matter, but here's are a couple of additional fragments that may help a bit (or perhaps cloud the broth):
 
No. 1 (1st ) Special Attack Corps (SAC) (Philippines)
Formed 20 Oct 44 at Mabalacat NAS/Luzon in the Philippines from 1st Air Fleet volunteers and it was the first of the Special Attack or kamikaze units.
 
Shikishima Unit (Philippines)
Assigned to 1st SAC; departed from Mabalacat; expended 25 Oct 44 (this was the first special attack unit expended in the Philippines and was credited with sinking the CVE USS St. Lo off Samar Is.).
These come from the following, which I feel is the most accurate and comprehensive English language published work on the special attack forces and beats Hoyt hands down:
Warner, Denis and Peggy Warner, The Sacred Warriors: Japan's Suicide Legions. New York: Avon Books, 1982.
 
Regarding 1 FR, it was:
 
....ordered to Clark Field on Luzon in the Philippines on 15-17 Oct with 41 FRANKs on strength as part of the SHO-Go 1 and 2 contingency plan build-up, staging through Shanghai and Taichu on Formosa.
Oct 44 – Feb 45: during the last week of Oct and the month of Nov, flew air defense of the Manila area and fighter escort for special attack (Kamikaze) missions directed against Allied landings on Leyte, with many of the latter being staged from Manapla airfield on Negros in the Central Philippines.
 
I have never seen any primary or secondary references to 1 Hikô Sentai flying special attack sorties during the time frame in question.
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: Martin <SkipperGrumby@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2002, at 5:09 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (richard dunn)
 
It's pretty much agreed upon Peir, that Yukio's Seki's flight is the first verifiably successful Kamikaze attack. A carrier was taken out that day, St.Lo? I forget. Anyway, an intriguing part of that flight was that the legendary Hiroyoshi Nishizawa was the leader of the Zero escorts, and he was very impressed with the results of the attack and, having a gut feeling or "premonition" if you will, that he would not live much longer, volunteered for the next days Kamikaze mission. Of course, Japan's greatest Ace was denied permission, and he died the next day when a bomber he was a passenger in was shot down by a patrolling Hellcat. However, Nishizawa's Zero was permitted to go on a Kamikaze assignment with a different Pilot. As for Kuno, it is widely belived that he likely:
 
1) Was shot down
 
2) Refused to return and ran out of fuel and ditched/crashed into the ocean
 
3) Was shot down by AA fire from a US ship that had no clue he was on a Kamikaze mission. The saw an approaching Japanese plane and shot it down. As was stated, no Japanese plane was reported to have crashed in the time element Kuno was in the air. At least, not in the scope of his range.
 
This is based on my readings. Anyone here know better, please correct me and both Peir and I may learn something new! :O) Oh yes, I concur that the JAAF did not initiate Kamikaze ops until after they saw the success and,equally important (almost) the morale builder that the JNAF had developed with the Kamikaze or Tokko squads.
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: Don Marsh <marsh44@fuse.net>
Date: Friday, 15 March 2002, at 9:32 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (richard dunn)
 
You wrote: "I think it is safe to say that neither the First Sentai nor any other Army unit flew the first Kamikaze mission." . . .Since this is not my field of expertise, I'm counting on you, or another member of these boards, to confirm my information:
 
I know that nearly all authoritative sources date the first kamikaze attacks in October of '44. However, since reading this thread, I've been driving myself crazy for the last two days looking for a quote, which has always stuck in my mind for the last 5 years or so, due to a fondness I have for the Ki-45. According to "The Concise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II" by David Mondey:
 
"One additional role was pioneered by the Ki-45 when, on 27 May 1944, four of these aircraft became the first to launch Kamikaze attacks, directed against Allied shipping operating off the coast of New Guinea."
 
Also, while maybe not to be considered an "official" kamikaze attack, another item I have in my notes regarding the Ki-45 is:
 
Yawata, Kyushu, 20 Aug 1944; The first B-29 daylight bombing of Japan takes place. First intentional ramming of a B-29 occured during this raid, by Sgt Shigeo Nobe of the 4th Sentai flying a Ki-45.
 
Any thoughts?
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Friday, 15 March 2002, at 11:21 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (Don Marsh)
 
Then there was Sgt. Oda ramming a B-17 over New Guinea on May 8, 43 and Lt. Yokazaki ramming a B-24 over the Kuriles on Sep 11, 1943. And there were others.
 
I think the focus here has been on "Kamikaze" meaning a high level policy of officially directed suicide attacks. This differs in both scope and the high level order from incidents of suicide attacks which occurred throughout the war.
 
On the Navy board, I've made an effort at defining terms. Helps if we can agree on what we are talking about!
 
Re: first kamikaze mission
 
Posted By: Martin <SkipperGrumby@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, 16 March 2002, at 5:06 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: first kamikaze mission (Don Marsh)
 
As long as men fly and fight, there were "suicide" dives on enemy targets. The Germans did it, the US did it, the Brits, French, Japanese, everyone. But the Special Attack or Tokko Squadrons (which are commonly referred to as "Kamikaze") was started by Admiral Takejiro Onishi of the IJN in the Phillipines in Oct of '44. These were not men who were disabled in combat and made a last minute decision to inflict another blow to the enemy prior to dying or rather than risk being captured. These were instructed to go out and die. Even Saburo Sakai's suicide flight that was launched from Iwo Jima in what, June or July of '44, prior to the organization of the Kamikaze SAC in the Phillipines does not officially count, although that's what they were. On a suicide mission. But...it was not a specially designated unit. The Iwo wing was getting decimated by the Hellcats, (a handfull of Aces and a bunch of greenhorns were not enough to stop the Hellcats) and pretty soon Iwo was to be left without air cover period.They had to find SOME way to inflict a blow to the US fleet, and a few aces like Sakai, Muto, Hagiri and Shiga splashing a few Hellcats was not going to cut it. They needed to take out a flat - top. With the screening Hellcats over the fleet a few torpedo and dive bombers didn't stand a chance of making it to the US fleet and inflicting enough damage, so the call was made. They never made it to the fleet being bounced by intercepting Hellcats, and the only Zero Pilots to come back that were sent on that mission were Kinsuke Muto, Sakai and his wingman Masami Shiga and a Gent named Shirai. (I don't think Hagiri was on that aborted mission, was he?) Still, the first verifiable official "Kamikaze" attack was led by Lt.Yukio Seki from Mabalacat, and Seki and or some of his fellow Tokko pilots sunk the St.Lo and damaged some other crafts. Carriers, if I recall correctly. Incidentally, I know that Shiga and of course Sakai survived the war, but does anyone one know what ever happened to Sakai's other Wingman on that mission, a fellow named "Shirai"? Did he eventually get shot down, did he go on a Kamikaze Mission or did he survive the war? Very interesting thread,Gents! I never fail to learn something from you folks! :O)
 
Biak Kamikazes?
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Saturday, 16 March 2002, at 8:29 a.m.
 
Regarding the Biak Kamikaze story I had a little delayed reaction and realized I had a bit more on it though I have never credited it but...
 
Japanese Monograpn No. 136 says the total Japanese reaction on May 27th at Biak was 9 Navy Zeros and 4 Army heavy bombers. It says 5 Zeros were lost [this is confirmed by 23d Air Flotilla War Diary] as well as four Army heavy bombers.
 
After stating the above numbers as the total effort the very next paragraph states: "It is a fact that the 7th Air division cooperated closely in this combat with its fill available strength, but full data concerning it are lacking. Maj. Takata, commander of the 5th Air Regiment, who was at Muni that day, took off for the battle and fearlessly crashed into an enemy warship in a 'suicide attack'. This was the very first of the Tokko attacks."
 
So that appears to be the Japanese version. 23d Air Flotilla does claim one sea truck (small transport) sunk and others as well as smaller craft set afire.
 
Other than Zeros strafing small boats the only shipping attack I have found is two fighters and four "light bombers" attacking SC-732. Three light bombers were claimed shot down in flames by ships including one by SC-732.
 
I suspect "four heavy bombers", "four light bombers" and "four Ki 45s" are all the same. NB the Japanese sometimes referred to the Ki45 as a heavy fighter [the editor of Mono. 136 may have never heard of a heavy fighter and 'corrected' the text to "heavy bomber"].
 
Clearly this was claimed to be a suicide attack. I remain dubious.
 
Additional facts welcome!
 
Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Ivan <ta152@iol.it>
Date: Thursday, 28 March 2002, at 1:07 a.m.
 
I would like to build a Ki 109 Hasegawa in 1/72.
I want to paint it with color scheme in 2 tones but i don't have references about this colors.
Can you help me?
 
Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Elephtheriou George <arawasi_g@hotmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 28 March 2002, at 5:53 p.m.
 
In Response To: Mitsubishi Ki 109 *PIC* (Ivan)
 
unfortunately there aren't many referrences regarding the Ki-109. Lets see...
FAOW #50 (blue series) June 1974.
Francillon p.194-196
MA #329 IJA fighters, p. 171, 172
AIR World's WWII IJA Aircraft, p.102
Green Arrow's X-planes, p.150
Koku Fan Ill. No.69, p.58, 59
Maru Mechanic No.32 (excellent details on the Ki-67 "Hiryu" but not much on the Ki-109)
 
Most of the above editions have the same photo that appear in Francillon's but only in MA #329 there are some b/w profiles.
 
Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Jim Long <jimilong@msn.com>
Date: Thursday, 28 March 2002, at 6:42 p.m.
 
In Response To: Mitsubishi Ki 109 *PIC* (Ivan)
 
When you say "color scheme in 2 tones" do you mean solid tones, such as an even dark tone on the upper surfaces and a light tone on the undersurfaces? You are not talking about a mottled finish, right?
 
Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Ivan <ta152@iol.it>
Date: Friday, 29 March 2002, at 12:35 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109 (Jim Long)
 
yes i mean a solid tones, dark tone on upper surfaces and light tone on under surfaces.
 
Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Mike Goodwin <Mike.Goodwin@iname.com>
Date: Friday, 29 March 2002, at 4:26 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109 (Ivan)
 
There are four pictures of these Ki-109s in Bueschel's book on the Ki-67, published by Schiffer. They are low contrast and a little fuzzy, but I am sure the publishers did their best. Two of the pictures are of a Ki-109 in US markings.
 
Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109
 
Posted By: Jim Long <jimilong@msn.com>
Date: Saturday, 30 March 2002, at 11:44 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Mitsubishi Ki 109 (Ivan)
 
The only reference I have found regarding the colors of the 2-tone solid camouflage on a Ki-109 is in the Model Art book No. 329, entitled "Camouflage & Markings of the Imperial Japanese Army Fighters." E. George mentioned this book in his posting.
 
Page 172 of the book has a profile and a top view of a Ki-109 with the solid upper and lower colors. The drawing caption says that the upper tone was a black brown and the lower surface was a light gray.
 
This book has two pages of color chips with formulas from a Japanese model paint supplier, Mr. Color. The formula, using Mr. Color paints, for the black brown is given as 50 percent white, 30 percent black, and 20 percent brown. The chip that is said to represent this formula looks like a deep mauve rather than a black brown. But the chip in my copy of the book might be flawed.
 
The book does not show a chip for the gray of the lower surfaces. The two Japanese characters that describe it are the symbols for "ash" and "white," which I translate as light gray.
 
That is about all that I know about this. Perhaps E. George will read this and check my facts
 
Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Sunday, 14 April 2002, at 12:38 p.m.
 
There were only two 5th AF fighter combats during February 1943 both occurred on Feb 6th near Wau, Papua, New Guinea. At that time ground fighting (Okabe Detachment versus Australians) was going on near Wau. Fifth AF transports were bringing in troops and supplies to the rough Wau airfield with well over 100 landings on some days. Fifth AF fighters escorted all these transport flights.
 
The Japanese Army and Navy air forces were in the middle of KE GO (the Guadalcanal evacuation operation) when word came that the Okabe Detachment was in desparate circumstances at Wau. Most of the 11th Sentai and a chutai of the 45th Sentai were transferred to Lae to support Okabe.
 
On the morning of February 6th 29 type 1 model 1 fighters and 9 type 99 light bombers headed to Wau to disrupt airlift operations. Approaching Wau at that time were 5 C-47s. Their fighter cover included eight P-40Es of the 7th FS and eight P-39Ds of the 40th FS.
 
The P-40s sighted what they took to be 12 "Beaufighters" and 12 escorting fighters. After noticing the hostile intent of this force they dove to attack and claimed 2 Lilys, 4 Zekes and 1 Hamp.
 
Capt. Thomas H. Winburn led the P-39s and sighted a formation of 18 Zekes with a second formation of 6 others coming from another direction. They were at 12,000 feet and also dove to attack. They claimed a "Lily or Sally" and 11 Zekes. Three pilots Winburn, 1/Lt Robert W. Schick and Capt. William F. McDonough claimed double victories. There is a famous picture of McDonough after this combat posing in front of his P-39 No. 23 with a Donald Duck emblem on the nose along with a white "23".
 
Meanwhile the Japanese bombed the airstrip where they encountered anti-aircarft fire which claimed two Zeros and a bomber. Some of the type 1 figters chased two of the C-47s and shot down C-47 #41-38658 of 33TCS, 374 TCG piloted by 1/Lt. Robert H. Schwensen. Wreckage of this aircraft was found in 1988. RAAF Bostons were engaged in ground attacks in the area and one of these which failed to return was a possible victim of Japanese fighters.
 
Three type 99 light bombers and four type 1 fighters were lost. Apparently the only US fighter damaged was a P-40 that took about 10 7.7mm hits.
 
Japanese losses include Regimental CO Major Katsuji Suguira and chutai CO Capt. Shigenori Miyabashi. Other losses were Tomechi Takaga and Tetsuo Sato. Lt. Sato's identity tag was recovered from the wreckage of his aircraft. Aircraft lost included Ki 43 Nos. 653 and 807 and possibly No. 805.
 
In the early afternoon the Japanese fighters conducted a follow up fighter sweep and reported engaging 14 P-38s. Their opponents on this ocassion included P-38Fs of the 9th and 39th FS as well as Airacobras (5 P-400s, 1 P-39K and 2 P-39D-2s) of the 41st FS. The 9th saw only three Japanese fighters and claimed one Zeke. Thirteen P-38s of the 39th saw a dozen Japanese fighters and claimed one.
 
The Airacobras at 13,000 feet saw 6 Japanese fighters at 7,000 feet and dove on them out of the sun claiming three destroyed and three probables.
 
Japanese bombs destroyed a Wirraway at Wau, blew up a signals hut, chewed up the airstrip and caused several casualties including three killed. The Japanese fighters claimed eight P-40s (six of them probable), 1 P-38 (a probable), and two large aircraft. The 45th Sentai claimed one large and five small aircraft on the ground as well as one fighter shot down.
 
Apparently all the Japanese losses occured during the first raid as the Australia 2/6th Battalion "saw three Japanese fighters and two bombers shot down in the dogfight and watched two other aircraft crash into the surronding hills as they limped for home."
 
Possibly other US fighters were damaged but I have not been able to substantiate anything beyond the one P-40 mentioned. Losses from Japanese sources which are verified by witnesses on the ground amount to 7 of which some may be attributable to anti-aircraft fire. US fighter claims are in excess of 20.
 
All these combats occured below 18,000 feet and most below 12,000 feet. At these altitudes the P-38's performance advantage over the older P-40Es and P-39s was marginal. The P-39s and P-40s met the larger formation in the first combat where the Japanese fighters were diverted by attacking transports as well as protecting their own bombers. US fighters had altitude advantage in each instance. Despite the claims, the second combat appears to be a draw with no losses on either side.
 
Under these tactical circumstances it appears the P-39 and P-40 could perform as well as the P-38.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43
 
Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Sunday, 14 April 2002, at 1:27 p.m.
 
In Response To: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (richard dunn)
 
Many thanks Rick - beautifully written. I have always thought the P-39 and P-40 unjustly under-rated with a combat record that tells quite a different story.
 
The 45th Sentai was the light bomber unit that attacked Hong Kong in December 1941, equipped then with the Ki-32.
 
Sugiura's Hayabusa I has been depicted as quite a colourful machine with multiple lightning bolts on the tail in the combined colours of the three Chutai and double white bands on the fuselage ahead of the hinomaru. Miyabashi, supposedly known as "The Red Falcon", flew another colourful bird, depicted on the cover of Bueschel's Schiffer re-print on the type. As a matter of interest do any of the combat/intelligence reports you have access to mention the colour schemes or markings of the claimed aircraft?
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Lae Oscar *PIC*
 
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 14 April 2002, at 4:15 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (Nick Millman)
 
You wrote, "Miyabashi, supposedly known as 'The Red Falcon,' flew another colourful bird, depicted on the cover of Bueschel's Schiffer re-print on the type."
 
The Oscar below is probably NOT that of "MIYABASHI," but it is colorful and it was captured at Lae, N.G. with a red or yellow "lightning flash" marking of No.11 F with the fuselage stripe of a Chutaicho.
 
Editors note: Picture no longer available
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Sunday, 14 April 2002, at 1:59 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (Nick Millman)
 
I don't have anything handy on colors. At least one type 1 fighter flew into Lae on February 4th (perhaps to take care of administrative details?). It was photographed on that date from an altitude of sixty feet by a Beaufighter. The lightning flash emblem is plainly evident on the tail. It appears light (possibly white) colored.
 
My narrative may make it appear that the Ki48s as well as the Ki 43s operated from Lae. I have no direct evidence of this. They probably flew from Rabaul and rv'd with the 11th over Lae. The records of the 22d Airfield Battalion at Lae indicate they supplied fuel to the 11th on 4th and 6th February but no indication that they serviced the 45th at that time.
 
I have only summary information on the wrecks captured at Lae. They included several early model Oscars (see my piece on Ki43-1 armament on this site). Perhaps someone has found additional information on the markings of Lae wrecks. That would help since we can identify the squadron affiliations of some of the wrecks from documentary evidence.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 *PIC*
 
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 14 April 2002, at 3:54 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (richard dunn)
 
You wrote:
 
"At least one type 1 fighter flew into Lae on February 4th [1943] (perhaps to take care of administrative details?). It was photographed on that date from an altitude of sixty feet by a Beaufighter. The lightning flash emblem is plainly evident on the tail. It appears light (possibly white) colored."
 
Editors note: Picture no longer available
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43
 
Posted By: Garth O'Connell <garth.o'connell@awm.gov.au>
Date: Monday, 15 April 2002, at 7:08 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)
 
Any idea on where NARA sourced this excellent image Mr Lansdale? Our Beau's were famous low level specialists, alongside USAAF B25's and some of the most dramatic images from the SWPA are from them ;)
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Lae Oscar Photo/NARA Negative No.
 
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 16 April 2002, at 4:45 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 (Garth O'Connell)
 
I cannot make out the writing on the negative clearly. It says something like:
 
"4'6 34 L 8 LAE /JIPO ...." The NARA negative no. is 80-G-65865.
 
Perhaps Rick DUNN can make out the source writing at the bottom of the photo with more clarity?
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43
 
Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Monday, 15 April 2002, at 2:36 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Combat Over Wau - 6 Feb 43 *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)
 
Outstanding! I have seen this one before but never reproduced so clearly! Lots of detail here for the magnifying glass!
 
Zero drop tanks against the revetment? Faded "kumogata" camouflage? Wing hinomaru with thin white outlines?
 
Brilliant candid shot - thanks Jim!
 
There's also a well known photograph of a Model I being examined by IJN personnel "somewhere in the SWP" (you can see it at the bottom of page 43 in FAOW 13 - 1988). It appears to be in a streaky mottle over n/m or a base coat - ever so slighly unusual for a Model I. A few Zeros stand behind it. Is it in the same context as this thread? Do you know the location?
 
Palembang Paratroop Invasion
 
Posted By: David Aiken <David_Aiken@hotmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 25 April 2002, at 1:41 p.m.
 
Terence O'Brien... t.o'brien@virgin.net ...asked me to post the following info on the Palembang Paratroop Invasion...he said that "...it is a tour de force for me simply to send an e-mail - you cannot expect a child's level of expertise in this medium by someone who is approaching ninety years of age."
 
Palembang Paratroop Invasion:
It is inevitable that there should be conflicting reports about the success of that Japanaese paratroop landing. The military setting there that day at Palembang was so disorganised, the action itself over the ensuing forty-eight hours so chaotic and its immediate outcome so
confused, that it is not possible to present one simple picture of such an event. If I give some of the elements in it you will perhaps understand why clarity should be so elusive.
 
There was no substantial ground force ready to resist the Japanese landing. A few days earlier I had taken the Austalian general Sir John Laverack on a reconnaissance of the Palembang approaches and he had been, even to me, a junior pilot, quite frank about the futility of trying to hold the position. I had picked him up at the big public airfield (P1) close by Palembang town and the oil field, and this was where the Japanese paratroops landed.. This main airfield had some defences, not just mock wooden guns as at our own airfield (P2) some eighty miles away in the jungle. At P1 was the remnants of a Hurricane fighter squadron from Singapore, at P2 was our remaining bomber force of perhaps twenty or so Hudsons (RAF and RAAF) and about ten Blenheims.
 
Command HQ at P1 had only poor contact with us at P2, where all our aircraft were engaged that day attacking the Japanese landing force and the barges coming up the river. Enemy paratroops landed near Command HQ at P1 who signalled they were closing down and that we at P2 must abandon it at once, pull back to Java with what we could take. Our squadron had just lost three of our remaining nine Hudsons in the river attacks, I was on stand-by again but was ordered instead to take our last six aircraft to Java. There at Batavia airport an RAF group captain threateaned to have me court-martialled for a panic flight, telling me there had been no parachutist landings at Palembang. He then disappeared, and I began a search at airport and Batavia town for some sort of allied command centre.
 
By nightfall I had still not found any authority, nor could we get any answers on the aircraft radio. The airport controller told me a Dutch pilot had reported that the position at Palembang was in fact still unresolved, that the P1 defenders had driven back the Japanese paratroops, and that the Japanese had still not discovered our jungle airfield at P2. But he had now lost radio contact with Palembang Night was falling. The apoplectic Group Captain had disappeared. I told our group to settle down on the airport floor, that decision would be made at dawn. As soon as daylight came I led the group off to the airfield at Bandoeng where we found about a dozen RAAF Hudsons which had also been told to flee P1 the previous afternoon. Also there was a Dutch fighter pilot who had just landed from P2 which he said was still undiscovered but that the major part of the Japanese landing force were now in control at P1, and a motorised unit was moving down the road that must soon lead them to discovery of our jungle airfield.
 
It was being abandoned but they had many sick and wounded, and no aircraft to get them away. We could not contact any command to authorise a return but after some discussion the outcome was that the six RAF Hudsons went back to P2, where we were able to land undisturbed, and by the end of that day were back in Java with over seventy men and a heavy load of the tools and equipment to keep our aircraft flying. We lost one aircraft on that return journey. And P2 was abandoned that night, all personnel finzally reaching Java by boat three days later - where we only lasted about another week.
 
That is an outline of what I, just one participant in the shambles, can tell of that Palembang landing. And here a few random grasps from memory...
 
In the confusion at P1 after the paratroops landed one RAF officer, meeting a Japanese in the perimeter area, had an argument about who should surrender to whom - I think the RAF man won, temporarily.........
 
Several of the oil tanks were on fire when we flew back that morning...... A fighter pilot, Terence Kelly, wrote a book entitled Hurricane in the Jungle about that action at P1 where his squadron remnant was located...... I have somewhere in my papers an account by one Hudson gunner who made three or four sorties against the barges....... the station commander at P2, Group Captain Macaulay RAAF, wrote a report about those days and it must be available somewhere (I have a copy)...... the grassy landing area at P2 must have been almost three miles long yet the Japanese never discovered it until their army troops stumbled across it in their southern advance...... Of General Sir John Laverack's infantry division only an advance party landed in Java where they were caught in the final surrender and most died on the Burma railway..... We lost all our Hudsons in the end, mine the last to go, but two of the RAAF ones managed to get back to Australia by mid-flight refuelling from cans of petrol in the fuselage and a hose out to the wing tanks....... the Japanese paratroops seem to have made little input into the capture of P1 - the barge-landed force was the deciding element - nor did they stop the Dutch from sabotaging the oil-field facilities.
 
Terence O'Brien t.o'brien@virgin.net
 
Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914
 
Posted By: Gabriel Garrido <garridog@teleline.es>
Date: Tuesday, 30 April 2002, at 4:03 p.m.
 
The German Possession of Tsingtao in China came under siege shortly after the outbreak of World War I in August, 1914. Heavily outmanned 13 to 1 and outgunned, the german pilot Gunther Plüschow flew reconnaissance missions in his Etrich Rumpler Taube around Tsingtao. As the war escalated, Japan's militarism was awakened and sent forces to join the British against the Germans. Plüschow, now a Lieutenant, flew his aircraft against 9 Japanese Army and Naval aircraft (the Japanese used in this siege the seaplane carrier Wakamiya that carried 4 early Henri and Maurice Farman seaplanes operational + 1 in reserve, in other source you can read that the Wakamiya carried 2 Farman operational and two more in reserve) and was unofficially credited with shooting down a Maurice Farman aircraft (an aviation first). He was given the name Dragon Master due to the dragon tattoo found on his left arm.
Apart this little information that I have found in the web, in the french magazine Wing Masters nº 12, you can read that the army used 4 Type Mo (Farman) planes and one Nieuport NG2 that flew the first combat missions of the Japanese air force (a bombing raid) and also they forced one Taube to run away (obviously the Gunther Plüschow plane). (This French magazine doesn´t speak about the use of naval planes)
Anybody could confirm or denie this claim or post more information about this combat. If it´s true that one Japanese plane was shot down, was it from the army or the navy?, what kind of weapon used the german to shot it down?
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914
 
Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@fidnet.com>
Date: Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 9:48 p.m.
 
In Response To: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914 (Gabriel Garrido)
 
There's a brief discussion of this campaign, insofar as the IJN's air arm in SUNBURST.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914
 
Posted By: John MacGregor <JohnMacG6@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 2:18 p.m.
 
In Response To: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914 (Gabriel Garrido)
 
Pluschow actually wrote his memoires of his time in Tsingtao. I have a French-language version of these (with pictures). It's called 'L'Aviateur De Tsingtao' and was published in 1931. I think this book has been re-published more recently and in English.
Try looking on www.bookfinder.com or
www.livre-rare-book.com (for French)
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914
 
Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 2:14 p.m.
 
In Response To: Aerial actions over Tsingtao 1914 (Gabriel Garrido)
 
the operations took place from 04 September until 06 November, 1914. The Japanese Army used 4 Maurice Farmans and one Nieuport NG (a monoplane) with 8 pilots. They flew 86 sorties and dropped 44 bombs.
 
The IJN had 4 Maurice Farman seaplanes, one three-seater and three two-seaters, and 7 pilots, flying 49 sorties and dropping 199 bombs.
 
The first IJN operational sorties were reconnaissance flights over Chiao-chou Bay on 05 September by a three-seater Farman piloted by Lt Hideho Wado and a two-seater Farman piloted by Sub-Lt Masaru Fujise. Using bombs made from naval shells with fins attached to them they managed to sink a German torpedo boat (some sources report a minelayer). This was the first successful attack by an aeroplane on a warship, although not the first bombing attack by an aeroplane.
 
The first IJA sorties were flown from Lungkou in Shantung Province on 21 September. Two Farmans and the Nieuport dropped bombs on German military camps.
 
The first aerial combat of the Tsingtao campaign occurred on 13 October when both Army and Navy aircraft attempted to intercept the Taube. Pluschow escaped by climbing into cloud at 9,000 ft and flew the Taube to Haichow to refuel. The Chinese authorities attempted to confiscate the aircraft but Pluschow set fire to it. An indication of the potential importance of this first encounter is the fact that only 8 days earlier, in France, the first aircraft ever to be brought down in aerial combat with a machine gun, an Aviatik, had been claimed by Sgt Joseph Frantz using a Hotchkiss in a Voison V89.
 
The Japanese Army imported two Nieuport monoplanes from France in 1913. One of these aircraft was a Nieuport NG two seater and the other a Nieuport NM three seater. They were both built in 1910 and of similar appearance. I have some photographs of them, one of which shows armament consisting of a long-barreled weapon on a makeshift tripod mounting, positioned to fire above the propeller. Unfortunately the pilot is obscuring the weapon so that its type cannot be discerned very well. It could be a Hotchkiss type machine gun - or just a heavy rifle.
 
The Nieuports appear to be in natural doped finish without markings, although I have seen a profile from one source which depicts a Rising Sun flag painted on the rudder.
 
I do not think any of the Japanese aircraft involced in the Tsingtao campaign were lost to enemy action.
 
Last dogfight
 
Posted By: Barrett <btillman63@hotmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 16 May 2002, at 1:46 p.m.
 
USS Yorktown's VF-88 conducted the last dogfight of WW II on 15 Aug, just over Tokurozama Airfled. Of 6 Hellcats involved, 4 were lost. I find contradictory sources of the number and types of Japanese a/c (9 were claimed destroyed), but it may have been a mixed army-navy formation. Any hard evidence? One of the VF-88 survivors, Maury Proctor, eventually met one of his opponents.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight(s)
 
Posted By: Graham Boak <graham@agboak.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sunday, 19 May 2002, at 3:49 a.m.
 
In Response To: Last dogfight (Barrett)
 
I believe that the Russian P-63 claim in Manchuria was later than August 15th, but I don't have the correct date to hand.
 
The BPF Seafire fight is usually regarded as the last WW2 dogfight.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight
 
Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Friday, 17 May 2002, at 2:46 p.m.
 
In Response To: Last dogfight (Barrett)
 
I'm very much a non-expert in late war info but I'll give you what I have available since you haven't gotten any other hits yet.
 
You probably already know that there were several combats reported that day from the US side. Twenty-six of 45 Japanese fighters were claimed over Chosi, Atsugi, and Sagami Wan. CAP shot down 8 aircraft approaching the fleet (a DD also claimed one) and five were claimed on the ground at Hyakwigahara. Busy day for war's end.
 
One combat involved 302 Ku from Atsugi with four Raiden and eight Zeros under Lt Hiroshi Morioka which engaged six Grummans. They claimed one and lost four.
 
Over Chiba Prefecture 252 Ku also suffered at least two losses. I have no details of this combat.
 
The JAAF 25th Independant Air Squadron also suffered a combat loss that date. No details. This is probably a mis-identification as I cannot place such a unit in the JAAF air defense OOB in July-August 45. 25th Fighter Training Unit should have been in Korea. Possibly this is a garble for the 24th Ftr Tng Unit which was part of the air defence OOB in Japan.
 
Hope this may be of some help.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight
 
Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Saturday, 18 May 2002, at 6:12 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight (richard dunn)
 
I think you're right about the misidentification of the 25th Ind Air Sqn. According to my records this Toryu equipped unit was under command of 2nd Air Army in July/August 1945 and stationed at Liaoyang, Manchuria.
 
It was activated on 19 August 1944 and at the end of the war supposedly had on strength 25 combat serviceable Ki-45, 25 officers, 80 NCO's and 236 OR's.
 
The reported loss could have been referring to the 28th Ind Air Sqn, a Ki-46 unit, part of 1st Air Army, and stationed at Togane?
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara *PIC*
 
Posted By: UCHIDA, Katsuhiro <2000GT-B@mui.biglobe.ne.jp>
Date: Saturday, 18 May 2002, at 6:07 a.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight (richard dunn)
 
It's very difficult to identify "which units" were involved and "where" they were involved...
I guess more dog fights might have happened than we expect.
 
As far as I know, Morioka of 302 Ku (Sorry! I know it's Army page.) lost two A6M Type 0 Fighters and one J2M Raiden and USS LEXINGTON (the aouthor of the book says "USS LEXINGTON".) lost four F6Fs over Atsugi City.
252 Ku (stationed at Mobara Naval Air Base under the command of the Hikocho Lt. Cdr. SHINGO, Hideki) lost at least five A6Ms and the RN lost two Seafires and one British Avenger few hours before the end of the war. (But 252 Ku might had met the USN planes at the same time.) As you know, fighting the enemy planes were almost forbidden to prepare the "Hondo Kessen (The Battle of the mainland)" and many units were allowed to intercept the enemy planes on August 15, 1945. (The Japanese High Commands allowed many of them to fight the enemies to "hide" the plan of surrender.)
I have no more information now.
 
Source:
"Heavy Clouds" by WATANABE, Yoji (Bungei Shunju)
"I Shot Down A Spitfire On The Last Day Of The War" by Lt. (jg) ABE, Saburo
 
Photo: Lt. (jg) ABE, Saburo (credit: Kasumi Shobo)
 
Editors note: Picture at http://www02.so-net.ne.jp/~kasumi/Picture/Navy1.gif
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara
 
Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@fidnet.com>
Date: Saturday, 18 May 2002, at 7:09 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara *PIC* (UCHIDA, Katsuhiro)
 
"Four days later [15 Aug 1944], in the Fleet Air Arm's final fighter combat of the war, eight of a formation of twelve Japanese fighters were shot down by Seafires of the 24th Naval Fighter Wing which were escorting an Avenger strike. A Seafire and an Avenger were lost, the gunner of the latter disposing of another Japanese fighter before ditching," from BRITISH NAVAL AVIATION (Sturtivant)
 
Aircraft in Profile No. 221 identifies the FAA squadrons as Nos. 887 and 894 (from HMS Indefatigable)
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara
 
Posted By: Barrett <btillman63@hotmail.com>
Date: Sunday, 19 May 2002, at 12:16 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara (Jim Broshot)
 
Things are complicated by the fact that earlier overland combats involved San Jacinto's VF-49 and Hancock's VF-6. Furthermore, Yorktown's Corsair fighter-bombers engaged Myrts over Hokoda A/D shortly after the VF-88 action. The subsequent 5 splashes by USN a/c were all offshore.
 
Of the USN's 34 credited victories during the day, only one Oscar was involved besides the Franks reported by VF-88, and that Ki-43 was in a fight that otherwise involved only A6Ms. I suspect more and more that JAAF planes may not have engaged at all. Proven incidents of JAAF/IJN planes flying mixed formations seem exceedingly rare.
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara
 
Posted By: Henry Sakaida
Date: Wednesday, 22 May 2002, at 5:27 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara (Barrett)
 
Barratt, perhaps you better use the title THE LAST MAJOR DOGFIGHT OF WWII...I wrote an article back in the 80s with the title THE LAST DOGFIGHT...and got some people ragging on me! Well, it does keep us in line and makes sure that we cross our Ts and dot our Is!
 
mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"'>Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara
 
Posted By: Barrett <btillman63@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 22 May 2002, at 11:13 p.m.
 
In Response To: Re: Last dogfight over Atsugi and Mobara (Henry Sakaida)
 
Point well taken Henry. I wondered about that when I posted this item, but looking at the 6-8 shootdowns that followed over the next several hours, none seemed worthy of the "dogfight" title! The most kills claimed in one event was three, and those were Myrts! I figger that a real dogfight needs at least a dozen combatants!
 
We could probably use up a lot of band width trying to define the term!
 
Return to Army Message Board