Allied Opinion of IJN vs. IJA Fighter Pilots

[GuerraCivil]

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.

[John Beaman]

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.

[Broncazonk]

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

[GuerraCivil]

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

[John Beaman]

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?