FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

On 20 March 1944, FM-2s of VC-63 off the USS Natoma Bay clashed with Ki-61 Tony fighters over Kavieng.

What IJA unit was this likely to have been?

Is anyone aware of any sources for this action in the form of combat reports, memoirs, or secondary accounts?

Thanks,

David Isby

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

David,
VC-63 ACA report 5 credits Lt. John H Dinneen and Ens. Rufus `P' Kirk with sharing a Tony at 1700 hours, at 02-35S, 151-45E. The report can be found at NARA II (College Park, MD).

Enjoy!

Frank.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

I hate to be stupid, and display my ignorance of IJAAF deployments, but I was not aware that any Ki-61 units deployed east of New Britain, and mostly west of there. Please correct me.

I wonder if this is an identity issue? Plus, by March '44, weren't most of the IJAAF units pretty well neutralized as McArthur worked his way up the New G. coastline?

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

John B. -

Your recollections and my records corolate - Kavieng was JNAF territory and I have no record of any JAAF units operating from there, especially at that late stage of the war. I even checked to see if any of the 12 or so Kōkūtai and carrier air groups that operated from or around Kavieng might have had a few Ki-61s, but there weren't any.

L.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Judy (the other non-radial in store) ?
http://natomabaycve62.org/logbook/VC63.html

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Thanks for that link It makes more sense. Not only is it an in-line engine, but an IJN machine.

So, Frank, where did the "Tony" come from, I wonder, since this log lists the claim as a Judy?

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

There are only 2 or 3 possibilities for Judy-equipped units in that area, and this is the strongest contender. It had a detachment with JUDYs at Kavieng. See highlighted portions.

552 Kōkūtai

(FPO Designation: U-204)


Formed 1 December 1942 at Tateyama NAS on Tōkyō Bay 47 mi SSE of Tōkyō in Chiba Prefecture/E Honshū as an attack air group initially equipped with Aichi D3A Type 99 carrier bombers (VAL). Assigned to 24th Air Flotilla/11th Air Fleet.[1]

25 May 43: transferred from Tateyama NAS to Bihoro NAS/N Hokkaidō; although not yet fully trained, it was ordered north with the rest of 24th Air Flotilla due to U.S./Canadian landings on Attu in the Aleutians and the implied threat to Kiska and the Kuriles. Reassigned to 22d Air Flotilla on 1 July and by mid-July the group had returned to Honshū with station at Kisarazu NAS.[2]
20 Jul 43: began transferring from Kisarazu to Roi on Kwajalein Atoll/Marshalls in the Central Pacific.[3]
Aug 43: moved from Roi to Mili Atoll/Marshalls during the second half of August.[4]
1 Nov 43: now mainly equipped with Yokosuka D4Y1/D4Y5 Suisei Navy carrier bombers (JUDY) and based at Mili Atoll in the Marshalls with 18 planes.[5]
Mid-Nov 43: ordered to Rabaul/New Britain in the Bismarcks/Solomons leaving just 3 D3A2 VALs behind at Mili.[6]
26 Jan 44: ordered to transfer from Rabaul to Truk Atoll in the Eastern Carolines this date.[7]
17 Feb 44: at Truk with 10 serviceable JUDYs - these were probably destroyed in the U.S. carrier strike on Truk this date.[8]
4 Mar 44: ordered disbanded.[9]


Commander:
Capt. Fujirō ŌHASHI (Dec 42 - Mar 43) (appt cancelled?)
Capt. Tomigi MAEHARA (Dec 42 - Mar 44) (per IJN Gazette)


Hikōtai Components [10]

None

Summary of Stations [11]

1 Dec 42 - 1 Jun 43: Tateyama
1-22 Jun 43: Bihoro with elements at:
Tateyama (1-28 Jun)
22 Jun – c 20 Jul 43: Kisarazu
c 20 Jul - 12 Aug 43: Roi/Kwajalein Atoll
12 Aug – c l Sep 43: Mili Atoll/Marshalls with elements at:
Tarawa Atoll/Gilberts (Aug)
Sep - Oct 43: whereabouts unknown
Nov 43 - Jan 44: Rabaul with elements at:
Mili (Nov)
Kavieng/New Ireland (Nov -Dec 43)
Feb 44: Truk Atoll


[1] JM#116; Thorpe-JNAF; Sekigawa:134; JICPOA JNAF OB (Microfiche F-2076):161.

[2] JM#89; JM#116.

[3] JM#116.

[4] JM#116.

[5] USSBS Interrogation/Translation #73.

[6] JM#116.

[7] JM#173.

[8] JM#173.

[9] JM#116.

[10] JM#116.

[11] JM#116.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

John,
THe VC-63 ACA Report #5 claims a Single Seater Fighter "Tony", and says Tony throughout the report. I do not know the provenance of the VC-63 Log linked by udf_00. It is not a copy of the Natoma Bay's deck log. It may be a copy of the VC-63 History, prepared after the cruise was over (if it was in fact prepared).

Interestingly, in checking the ACA Report #5 I noticed a hand-written, penciled remark at the bottom of the first page, noting that VC-7 had also claimed the Tony. Checking my claims database I found that I did not have any entries for VC-7. So I pulled up my copy of the reports from VC-7 (based on the Manila Bay), and found its ACA Report #10-44, in which they credit Ens. John T Milnes with a Tony, "Smoking around engine & starboard wing". This combat started at 0519 GCT, approx. 75 miles east of Kavieng, and continued with about a ten minute chase. ACA #10-44 states:

quote

Ens. Milnes made three runs on the Jap. On his last run he got on the Jap's tail and at the time he pulled off the Tony was smoking around the engine and starboard wing.

1634: As Ens. Milnes pulled out, a VC-63 plane got on the Jap's tail and fired a long burst into the Jap. The Tony began burning, went over on its back and crashed in the water. The pilot did not get out. The position was 70-mi. due east of the U.S.S. Manila Bay.

end quote

So both units identified the aircraft as a Tony. The "1634" would correspond to 0534 GCT. At this point in the war ACA reports were to be prepared using GCT time. Later in the war they switched to using local time and indicating the time zone involved.

Enjoy!

Frank.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

VF18 claimed a Tony off Kavieng on 1 January 1944, but as all the other claims that day were Zekes it may have been misidentified.

George Kernahan

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Thanks George. I assume the Zeke claims were also from VF18?

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

FROM: Japanese Aircraft Combat Performance: Excerpts from Aircraft Action Reports and Battle Narratives, February-May 1044, Air Intelligence Group, Division of Naval Intelligence, Office of the CNO, Op-Nav-16-V-#E-3110, July 1944
Operations against Kavieng, 20 Mar 1944 Task Group 36.3, USS Natoma Bay, CO H.L. Meadow, Capt
FM2s vs. Tony
“The most effective angles of attack on the Tony were high-side runs from either quarter. Tony’s best defense was the use of violent skids and turns just over the surface of the water. The final attack was successful because the Jap pulled up into a climb to the left, giving both FM2s a wide-open chance for good shots,
Jap Tactics
“The Jap pilot apparently thought he was fighting F4Fs, and that he had a vastly superior edge in speed as well as maneuverability. In the tail chase he gave no indication of concern over his ability to out-run his pursuers, maintaining his original course of 035 degrees, and only when the FM2s began closing at sea-level did he drop his wing-tank and commence evasive tactics.
Tony’s Performance
“After dropping his wing-tank Tony appeared to slow up rather than increase speed, the cause unknown, although black smoke trails from his engine indicated a very rich gas mixture. Tony … dropped what seemed to be magnesium streamers, which left cylindrical smoke trails.
“Tony may have had armor around pilot as 50 cal hits in the cockpit splintered the enclosure, and caused engine to smoke. But the pilot apparently was not hit.
Comparative Plane performance
”FM2 is considerably more maneuverable than FM1, but still not as maneuverable as Tony
VC-63 Pilot’s Report: Fifty-Mile Chase to Catch Tony
After the bombardment, during the retirement of the task force, the four FM2s on combat air patrol were vectored out to intercept a bogey reported 45 miles ahead. Planes flew at 180 knots, climbing to 9500 feet. A Tony was sighted and overhauled after a 50-mile chase. Using full throttle, the FM2s descended from 9500 feet to 400 feet in a shallow dive at 330 knots. Closing was gradually made at sea level at indicated air speed of 275 to 280 knots., The Tony made extremely sharp turns at full speed, turning inside the FM2s and leaving distinct vapor trails in turns at all altitude. The Jap was bracketed by the fighters which made passes and head-on runs. Two more FM2s approached from above and behind and fired on his tail. Practically on the water by this time, the Tony made a turn to the left and received hits on the engine from the FM2 on the starboard quarters. The Jap then pulled up into a climb to the left and was finished off in a final attack which sent him spinning into the water in flames.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

The answer may be at NARA College Park in RG 38 Crane Collection/Orange Library. There will be intercepts there of all coded and uncoded Japanese transmissions eminating from Kavieng including details of this engagement and loss, which units were at Kavieng on this date and what type of aircraft they had. You could also try asking your question on http://www.j-aircraft.com/

L.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

John,

Just to clarify:

12 Zekes were claimed over Kavieng on 1 January by VF18 (Bunker Hill) and VF30 (Monterey).

The Tony, one of two seen, was intercepted about 20 miles from the Task Group. It appeared to be painted black and had underwing fuel tanks. When attacked it attempted to loop back on to the tail of the attacker, which makes it unlikely to have been a Judy. Would the latter have tried mixing it in a dogfight?

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Well, the mystery deepens.

The comment of underwing tanks might indicate a Tony, if not a "black" one. And, no, unless it was a very aggressive pilot, I would not think a Judy would attempt to dogfight. Of course, an Immelman would be an attempt to get away....

It always amazes me how bad the pilots of all nations were in a/c ID. Of course, the stress of combat might help this. I know we latter day historians are deep into ID'ing and can recognize sillouetes easily. But if I were in combat I think I might spend some time learning how to recognise aircraft if for self-protection if no other reason.

I also wonder how much of bad ID'ing might be implanted by intelligence or wishful thinking? Within weeks of USAAF sending out notifications about the Fw 190D9, they were being encountered in combat reports in the early summer of 1944, in spite of the fact they were not operational until late fall.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

You know, I sometimes amaze even myself with my stupidness! For whatever reason I thought Kavieng was near Bougainville. Of course it is not. Its location, NNW of Rabaul, makes it theoretically possible for a Tony to have been in the area. Its about 200 miles +- from the New Guinea coastline. Weird but possible.

I need to brush up on my geography.:o

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

The underwing fuel tanks may indicate a ferry flight from Truk to New Guinea via Kavieng/Rabaul, maybe ? Even if it seems to me that the IJAAF aircraft will rather come from Palau to New Guinea.

As for the wrong ID often reported, I agree that most of us are more capable than WWII pilots. But nobody is shooting at us and the pictures we are looking at are not twisting in all senses to avoid our fire.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Sakaida, Henry. The Siege of Rabaul. St.Paul (MN): Phalanx Publishing Co., Ltd., 1996. ISBN: 1-883809-09-6. Pb (oversize with laminated cover). 96p. Heavily illus. Appendix.
Chapter 8: Rabaul’s Torokina Campaign, pages 35-37.

Using the original Japanese flight records together with a lengthy article published in a 1975 issue of Maru Magazine entitled, “Saigo No Rabaul Zero Sen Tai Kito Seiri” (“Last Zero Squadron Returns Safely”), author Sakaida describes how IJN HQ at Rabaul was notified by radio that 4 enemy battleships were approaching Kavieng on 20 March and 10 Zeros were dispatched from Tobera airfield south of Rabaul. Shortly after take-off, the formation was fired on by Japanese AA near Vunakanau, one Zero was hit and several experienced technical problems at about the same time so the mission was aborted. A few hours later in the afternoon a second mission with 7 bomb-carrying Zeros was launched and on their arrival in the Kavieng area, spotted the Natoma Bay, and went after it claiming a near hit. This is the same combat in which the American after-action report, “Bombardment of Kavieng”, states that Navy fighters shot down a Tony 45 miles off the Natoma Bay. Japanese records reported no losses. Nor does the author mention the presence of any Tonys anywhere near Rabaul or Kavieng.

Go figure.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

At the beginning of 1944, the Ki-61 equipped 68th & 78th Sentai were at Wewak (500 miles from Kavieng).
Judy could haul two 330 liters underwing drop-tanks.
No recollection of a dog-fighting Judy but some vague recollection of dog-fighting Vals.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

While this discussion seems to be sliding toward the type that is never resolved, I will add one final comment. There is a book that gets about as close as can be to a definitive study of JAAF air operations along the coast of northern New Guinea because of the author’s use of Japanese documents and Sigint intercepts:

McAulay, Lex. MacArthur’s Eagles: The U.S. Air War Over New Guinea 1943-1944. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2005. ISBN 1-59114-479-5. 248p.

The author has 16 pages (pp.160-76) covering the period 16-31 March and says what few serviceable Tonys were left in 68 and 78 Sentais had already been flown to Hollandia by 16 March. By 20 March, nothing was left of Wewak but shattered, smouldering wrecks, landing strips with craters 30-feet deep, broken, felled trees, defoliated surroundings and Japanese dead. Since Hollandia is 700 miles due west of Kavieng, that sort of puts it beyond the range of any Ki-61s based there. Further, McAulay has an Appendix C that lists by Sentai all JAAF in-air fighter losses from August 1943 to April 1944. Neither 68 or 78 Sentai had any between 15 and 31 March.

L.

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

MacArthur’s Eagles: The U.S. Air War Over New Guinea 1943-1944. A great book!

Re: FM-2s vs. Tonys over Kavieng, 20/3/44
 

Yes, underwing drop-tanks does not remove the possibility that the plane was a Judy and there were several cases Vals dogfighting with Allied fighters. But I also cannot recall a dog-fighting Judy but my knowlede on late 43 - early 44 aerial warfare in SWP is fairly limited.

Juha