|
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-23-2006, 12:42 PM
| #16 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,240
| Quote:
__________________  "Ivan the Terrible or Russian Achilles" Ivan Kozhedub - Hero of the USSR (x3), Order of Lenin (x2), Order of Red Banner (x7), Order of Alexander Nevsky, Order of the Great Patriotic War (x2), Order of the Red Star (x2), 62 kills during 1943-1945 | |
|         |
|
11-23-2006, 01:37 PM
| #17 |
| Minister of Whoopass   Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 18,463
| I dont think the Japanese really had quite an idea how bad it was till after the War... Commanders would tell their superiors about fanastic multi-kills and Americans by the dozens falling from the skies, being machine gunned in their chutes the whole way down... The militaristic masters were lied to almost non-stop towards the very end of the War...
__________________  My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk My 1/32nd Rendition of His Corsair: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/2-p...3-a-20416.html |
|
| |
|
11-23-2006, 01:37 PM
| #18 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg)
Posts: 1,753
| My vote goes to the japanese Me-262 derivate, the Kikka. Altough hi alt really is no necessarity as most B-29 sorties over japan were issued at low- medium altitudes due to the low AAA thread and the fact that the bombload and dropping precision decreased with altitude. The N1K1J George was adequate for this task but what the IJAF really missed is proper tactics.
__________________ ---delcyros--- |
|
| |
|
11-23-2006, 01:48 PM
| #19 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 679
| Which fighters were used more often for B-29 escorts, the P-51D or the P-47N? |
|
| |
|
11-23-2006, 06:12 PM
| #20 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: London Ontario Canada
Posts: 303
| I am suprised that Japanese did not buy the he280. |
|
| |
|
11-24-2006, 08:18 AM
| #21 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,820
| Jumping around on a bunch of posts on this one. Nicodemus, it is my understanding that the Mig 15 was designed to deal specifically with the B29 as a point interceptor. Hence the 37MM/23MM armament. I have heard (allegorically) that the B29s over North Korea were hammered by the Mig15, the Sabres could not keep them off the bombers. Not a good time for the 29s. After a while of this, the 29s moved to night bombing where the Mig's advantages weren't decisive. Was that 10,000 sortie rate for the month of July 1945 or was that for the whole war up to July of 45? I ask because the 29 was doing a lot of other missions (bombing Okinawa, Mine Laying, ect) at the same time and not all of the attacks were over mainland Japan. Just curious as to the numbers. Would give the Me-262 the kudos as the best German "anti-B29" machine. Had the highest speed (rendering the defensive firepower of the B29 next to, if not in fact, useless) and a heavy battery of cannons to make the short time it was in range of a B29 a very dangerous time for the bomber. Speed and firepower seem like the deciding factor on the best bomber killer. Also gives it the speed to outrun the escorts. |
|
| |
|
11-24-2006, 08:44 PM
| #22 |
| aka Dickcheese  Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Washington State
Posts: 14,008
| Where did we get off track on this thread. Me-262s, MiG-15s, He-280s.... Most of the "most" effective...whatever that means...Japanese fighters against B-29s were last ditch efforts that were a combination of high altitude dives over targets or those who did a tail pursuit with altitude advantage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were rarely Japanese attacks in similar formations nor tactics like in the ETO.
__________________  "Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the [U.S.] Marines don't have that problem." -- Ronald Reagan Master of Duplicate Posts |
|
| |
|
11-25-2006, 05:23 AM
| #23 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg)
Posts: 1,753
| I estimate You hit the nail on itīs head. Differences are tactics first. With unproper interception tactics even high performance interceptors are worth nothing. I think the IJAF was underestimating the US efforts in heavy bombers a lot and therefore failed to develop proper tactics.
__________________ ---delcyros--- |
|
| |
|
11-25-2006, 05:29 AM
| #24 |
| "World Traveller"  Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Royal Deeside/St Andrews, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,520
  | True but on the subject of Matt's post the best overall B-29 killer was the Mig-15.... Of the Japanese ones though none where really good at taking down heavy bombers (as is shown by the B-29 loses) and the tactics weren't really in existance (there was always ramming of course). With proper tactics the loses of B-29's I think would not of increased dramatically as the aircraft being used for the most part had to expend a lot of ammo in bring down the B-29 and therefore where in its defensive fire for a fairly long time.
__________________  "Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts" Sir Winston Churchill "To him the People of the World Largely owe the Freedom and Liberties they Enjoy Today" Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum My Photo Collections on Flickr |
|
| |
|
11-25-2006, 05:32 AM
| #25 | |
| Der Crewchief  Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 34,079
| Quote:
__________________  fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" | |
|
| |
|
11-25-2006, 09:07 AM
| #26 |
| aka Dickcheese Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Washington State
Posts: 14,008
| Ah. 
__________________ "Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the [U.S.] Marines don't have that problem." -- Ronald Reagan Master of Duplicate Posts |
|
| |
|
11-25-2006, 11:58 PM
| #27 | |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO  Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,874
| Quote:
B-29s in Korea were placed at a disadvantage by some of the tactics used - there were times during night mission where Migs attempted to intercept them but the gunners were told not to fire in fear of giving up a visual position in the sky. Later in the war that changed. As stated only 16 B-29s were lost to Migs but most of those losses happened during earlier part of the war. BTW for the benefit of the newer guys (I've mentioned this before), my uncle was a B-29 radio operator and flew during that period, his B-29 was shot down but he survived.
__________________ > I Support Doug Gillis < | |
|
| |
|
11-26-2006, 04:41 AM
| #28 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Vivian, Louisiana
Posts: 316
| On-topic: I would go with the Ki-44 with two 40mm and two 20mm, I think maybe the Ki-44 III KAI? Not sure, but it had the turbocharged engine in it - limited production - but I would love to fly one. Not sure the japanese had an effective B-29 killer in any significant numbers at all... |
|
| |
|
11-26-2006, 10:53 AM
| #29 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,820
| Quote:
Two 20mm and two 40mm on a single seat fighter?! I'd heard they were two 30mm, but not heard they were 40mm. If that is accurate (and I really don't know for sure), it would make it a very sloppy bird to fly. A lot of weight. Definitely would affect the high altitude performance and probably make it an easy mark for the escorts. IMHO | |
|
| |
|
11-26-2006, 11:24 AM
| #30 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 3,917
| The Ki44 did have a version armed with the 40mm but it was a failure. The ammunition was caseless with a very poor MV and a short range which would have meant the fighter having to get very close and they would have been shot to pieces. One factor that should be considered is the standard of Jap radar. They certainly had radar but its performance was poor compared to the German and allied designs and the standard of the crews tended to be lower due to the view most leaders had of people who were not in the front line. If you are going to intercept bombers coming inover the sea then you need good long range radar which the Japanese didn't have in quantity. With a lack of warning they had little chance of getting large formations of fighters in the right place to carry out co-ordinated attacks. Peoples views on this would be appreciated. I understood that the Raiden was potentially a good B29 attacker but it was spoiled if not ruined by some design weaknesses but mainly very poor production quality controls. |
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
