Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

The airwar over South Pacific and German-Soviet front was different. Airacobra was quite decent plane in low and medium altitudes, which were the most common battleground over German-Soviet front whereas over West Europe and Pacific the combat took place at higher altitudes unsuitables for Airacobra. Soviets also removed wing guns from Airacobras making them lighter and more nimble than the planes used by US pilots at Pacific. The main technical problem was the Soviet fuel quality which was unfriendly to Allison engine.

Not all US pilots in South Pacific considered P-39 terrible and many pilots said probably more bad words of the type than it actually deserved. Although personal opinions of different pilots are subjective, Charles Yeager considered the that at low and medium altitudes Airacobra was as good as the pilot who flew it. The main technical problem was the poor performance at high altitudes. Boyd D. Wagner stated that Airacobra was excellent interceptor up to 5400 meters and that P-39 was better than Kittyhawk/Warhawk (opinion shared by Soviet pilots who flew both P-39 and P-40). Charles King stated that skilled Airacobra pilots could hold their own against IJN and IJA pilots and were able to achieve about 1:1 score against them. The problem was that Airacobra was not good enough for clear air and technical superiority like Hellcat, Corsair or P-38 could do vs. Zero/Oscar.

When it comes to IJN/IJA pilots, I´m aware of the dubious nature of Caidin book Samurai! Sakaida book Winged Samurai has been more recommended as more accurate, but it has been out of print long time. However the claim in Samurai! that IJN pilots were better than IJA pilots due to better training might be true to some extent but I do not believe that the difference was big. However Zero was better plane than Oscar (and Nate). Modified land-based version of Zero would have been better standard equipment for IJA fighter units than Oscar.

One could speculate how well AVG with its Tomahawks would have done against Zeros flown by some top IJN unit like Tainan Kokutai. Anyway IJA did not lost as many planes to AVG as AVG pilots claimed - the overclaim ratio of AVG may have been about 3:1 - quite normal overclaim ratio in WW2 - based on good faith and optimistic interpretation of combat results. Japanese (both IJA and IJN) overclaimed often much more. This has been a problem recognized by Japanese airwar historians and they have in many cases dropped the number of confirmed personal and unit air victories to much lower level than the official wartime figures.

At the beginning of Pacific War IJA pilots were pretty well trained and their average skill level probably near of IJN pilots. Sakai (?) claim that IJNAF pilots were better (?) than IJAAF may have something to do with the traditional controversy and competition between Navy and Army - making Navy guys telling that they are better than Army guys.

During the course of war IJA had same problems as IJN - most of skilled pilots had to flew up to the point when they were KIA, MIA or WIA. And as there was not enough trained decent reserve, the average skill level of IJA dropped gradually.

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

Guys, this is a great thread, but we seem to be coming repetitive. I do not think this will ever be resolved, per se, one way or the other.

Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

I didn't abandon you guys, I've been reading every word. I just don't have the knowledge to say anything smart. (I'm better with Luftwaffe stuff.)

Bronc

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

Here is an interesting article about the air combats between AVG and 64th Sentai of IJA, which was one of best IJA fighter units: http://forum.warthunder.com/index.ph...5#entry1153396

The bias is on Japanese side, but still it helps to get somewhat more balanced view than the official AVG story - one should remember that the spring time of 1942 was bad time for the Allies and AVG´s success story was very much needed. In that situation everyone was just happy with all air victory claims and the scrutiny to check them was less than for example in some units of Luftwaffe. As Carl Molesworth puts it in his book on Curtiss P-40 Tomahawk:

"The AVG was officially credited with 297 enemy aircraft destroyed, 229 in the air... the true figure - whatever it might be - is irrelevant. The AVG successes gave the American people something to cheer about during dark days of (early) 1942 when war was going very poorly for Allies."

Well, I do not agree with Molesworth. I think that it is a duty of any serious airwar historian or aficionado to try to dig out the truth and figure out the true level of air victory records - they are not irrelevant! IIRC, the verified AVG victory record is nowadays recognized to be around 100-115 destroyed Japanese planes (which is still a good record for AVG).

But going back to 1942 and the way how things were thought at that time, Molesworth makes very good point of the attitudes and propaganda needs of the wartime. It certainly does boost morale up more to have a record 300 destroyed Japanese planes than a record of 100.

Japanese had those same needs and overclaiming was accepted more easily than by AVG side. IIRC, IJA pilots destroyed the whole AVG plane inventory more than once if we are to believe their claim records. At one point IJA pilots may have felt that there was a unlimited supply of shark-mouthed P-40´s fighting against them! Maybe Japanese commanders knew that the air victory claims of most of their pilots were not accurate, but nevertheless accepted them.

I have no problem with AVG overclaiming rate - it is actually quite moderate. More troublesome is the much more massive Japanese overclaiming which makes me to wonder what there was behind their official air victory records. Simply erroneus assesments made in good faith by IJA pilots or something else?

I think that Chris Shores has put it quite well about the overclaiming: http://www.warbirdforum.com/claiming.htm

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

GuerraCivil,

Your last post is quite good.

I have talked with Dan Ford often about the AVG claims. He says that at the most recent (late '90s, early 2000's) reunions (they do not have them these days), the AVG pilots are claiming over 600. When confronted with the actual Japanese loss records, the pilots claim the Japanese faked their losses for fear of loss of face. Well, I do not know of any commander, Allied or Axis who would do that, as one wants replacement a/c and pilots ASAP! If their propagandists want to fake, then fine, but at the unit level, no.

I agree the AVG actual loss/claim record is quite good considering the circumstances, but apparently the vets want to delude themselves.

The Allies did the same thing. Recall the first 8th AAF raid on Lille when bomber gunners claimed 102 German planes? (More than the strengths of JGs 2 and 26), and the actual loss was 2. The Allies knew the true losses, thanks to ULTRA, but decided to leave it for "morale" purposes.

Every nations' AF and Navy units overclaimed, mostly in good faith. That's WWII before electronic intel verification. The worst Allied over-claiming was the 5th AAF with Kenney. I recall a statement from Life Magazine, saying, in 1950, "for once the Japanese out-Kennyed Kenny" in claims!

BTW, I heard that Air Marshall Johnny Johnson, did not believe Pips Priller's claims against the RAF, but his own review and digging verified the claims. Is this true?

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

I have read that Johny Johnson indeed found Pips Priller´s claims to be accurate. However, he was very doubtful with Marseille´s claims (specially remarkable one day records) and made sceptical comments on them in his memoirs.

Going to IJA / IJN pilots, I do not know who of them or which units have been found to be the most accurate claim records. Who is the top Japanese ace or which is the top IJA/IJN unit by the verification of Allied records? It would be interesting to know - it might well be that the top pilots and top units were other than those ranked by official Japanese records!

I happen to know parallel from the Soviet-Finnish Winter War 1939-1940. Very top Soviet fighter unit was 7 IAP with 68 "confirmed air victories". The recent studies (using Finnish data) have dropped that figure to 9 verified air victories. Other Soviet unit 49 IAP was less successfull in Winter War with 16 "confirmed air victories". However 49 IAP was quite accurate in its claims and Finnish records have confirmed 9 of its air victories. 49 IAP was less rewarded and less famous than 7 IAP, but it destroyed equal number of Finnish planes as 7 IAP. The real difference between the two units was in their way of confirming air victories.

There may have been similar differences in IJA/IJN units depending on the commanders and some IJA/IJN pilots may have been more accurate in their claims than others.

Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

I've been reading John B. Lundstrom's, The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign : Naval Fighter Combat from August to November 1942 which is superlative. (I read it cover to cover, and then immediately began reading it again.)

Lundstrom mentions an interesting fact: in the after-action reports of the fighter squadrons that fought in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons (24 August, 1942) "several officers commented on the visible deterioration of enemy pilot skills."

Already, in late August, 1942, the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Indian Ocean raid, the Battle of Coral Sea, Midway and Aleutian Island foray had taken a visible toll on the quality of the naval aviators of the Kido Butai.

And the battle was only beginning in the Solomons. I never realized how utterly devastating the attrition in the Solomons was to Japanese naval aviation. By late September, Japanese commanders in Rabaul were worried by the quality of Japanese replacement pilots, and by late October of 1942, they were alarmed.

Bronc

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

One often forgotten factor is that the medical supplies and maintenance reserves of Japanese frontline units in the Pacific were less than those of the Allied units. For example many Japanese fighter units lacked quinine or other medicines to treat malaria - this was a big problem already in 1942 when Japanese supply lines were already over-stretched. The situation got worse with time when Japanese supply lines came under growing pressure and were often cut by the continuing sinking of Japanese cargo ships by US submarines and aircraft attacks.

At the average level Japanese pilots were more sick and less supplied than their Allied counterparts (who also suffered considerably of the trophical diseases). Many otherwise well-trained and experienced Japanese fighter pilots had to climb to the cockpit of Zero (or Oscar) being ill and almost all Japanese pilots at the South Pacific were weakened by malaria. I have read about some pilots going to combat even when they were suffering of fever. Perhaps this was not so much of stubborn "samurai/banzai" attitude than a reflect of the grim situation when even sick men were forced to combat by their superiors.

You can hardly expect them to have been in top-form in air combat - the sick man in the cockpit is slower to react in combat situations and his instincts are less sharp than those of the healthy (or less sick) pilot.

This may have been a considerable handicap for the overseas IJA/IJN units in South Pacific and one of the very reasons why the combat skills of Japanese pilots seemed to go down already during the mid/late 1942. When it comes to the training level and average skills of IJA/IJN pilots by late 1942/early 1943 I guess that they were still higher than by late 1943 and 1944.

Re: Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

For that Japanese can only accuse the shortsightness of their high command, in late 30s Java produced some 97% of the world's quinine supply, so they had lots of quinine available and could have transported it to the SWPacific area if they had decided so, on subs if necessary.

Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots
 

Another interesting fact contained in John B. Lundstrom's, The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign : Naval Fighter Combat from August to November 1942 is the incredible distance Japanese pilots were flying to engage marine and navy F4F Wildcats, all of 560-miles ONE WAY (Lakunai airfield, Rabaul to Lunga Point.) The marines went ashore on 7 August, (Henderson Field became operational on 20 August,) and by 12 September, after only thirty-six (36) days of flying that enormous distance back and forth, mission after grueling mission, Base Air Force Rabaul was down to 97 operational aircraft from a pre-invasion T.O. of 277 aircraft. (45 operational Zero fighters, out of 106 operational Zeros on 6 August, (BUT only 17 of these were Type 21's that could actual get to Guadalcanal, the rest were Type 32's,) and 30 operational Bettys out of 120.)

Japanese planners took giants steps down the Solomons...without constructing intermediate support bases and airfields!

Bronc