P-40 vs. Zero

[Twitch]

I'm a little queasy about saying that the P-40 was effective in the Pacific. The success of the AVG in the CBI theater was pretty unique over all. When facing the Japanese Army it may have barely survived and even held its own to some extent but against the Navy it was meat on the table like the Buffalo and Airacobra.

[syscom3]

The P40 was flown with great effect in the SW Pacific after the pilots completey understood not to dogfight Japanese aircraft and to use the diving and zoon charachteristics of the plane to its advantage.

If anything, the IJA "Oscar" frequently found over New Guinie was the plane that was "meat on the table"

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Twitch

I'm a little queasy about saying that the P-40 was effective in the Pacific. The success of the AVG in the CBI theater was pretty unique over all. When facing the Japanese Army it may have barely survived and even held its own to some extent but against the Navy it was meat on the table like the Buffalo and Airacobra.

The stats don't show that. This is from an earlier post

"For the entire 1942 combat year the FEAF lost 148 fighter aircraft in air-to-air combat while destroying 212 fighter aircraft = 1.43 to 1 FEAR vs Japan. You could slice numbers and do more research and attempt to insert Japanese aircraft by type, but considering the most numerous aircraft were the Zero and Oscar, these numbers do not represent great success by the IJN or JAAF. That's history!!!

And also consider the USN had a similar record after Midway while flying the F4F...

P-38s were entering the scene in late December 1942 so these numbers mainly come from P-39s, P-400s and P-40. We could throw in the fact that the best of the Japanese pilots were on scene during this period but the bottom line the IJN and JAAF did not do as well against US forces as history leads us to believe despite touting the Nishizawas, Iwamotos and Sakais (nothing against them). The US were beating back the IJN and JAAF with P-40s P-39s and P-400s (F4Fs for the USN) and the numbers prove it. Now one could challenge the accuracy of FEAF kill confirmation processes and try to compare them with Japanese losses, but I guess that's for another thread....

Consider the aircraft, pilot skill and the way history actually played out...."

Here the site I got my numbers from...http://www.usaaf.net/digest/operations.htm

[Wildcat]

The P-40 did its share in the PTO, it wasn't the best aircraft, But it was available when it was needed the most and helped hold the line. For instance,75 sqdn RAAF was formed and equipped with P-40's in early March 1942. The squadron had just 9 days to train on their new aircraft after which they were deployed to Port Morsby on the 21st of March to try and stop the Japanese. The unit went into action immediatley after arriving, and despite being the only fighter squadron in New Guinea at the time and greatly out numbered, they held out for 44 days before being relieved by USAAC P-39's. The squadron flew back to Australia with 1 Kittyhawk intact. 75 sqn lost 12 pilots KIA and lost 22 aircraft but had shot down 17 enemy a/c, probably destroyed 4 more and damaged a furthur 29.
The P-40's also played a major role in the defeat of the Japanese at the Battle Of Milne Bay. The Zero might have been superior but they certainly didn't have it all their way. On top of this the P-40's also had considerable success defending Darwin from Japanese fighters and bombers in 1942.

[R988]

Did they really have success in Darwin? Most of what I have read seems to say they didn't do squat, though I haven't looked at it with any detail.

[Soren]

Just remember that at the time the US confirmation system was anything 'but' thorough.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by R988

Did they really have success in Darwin? Most of what I have read seems to say they didn't do squat, though I haven't looked at it with any detail.

The numbers speak for themselfs - In looking at these numbers they are consistant with what the USAAF was doing at the same time.

Originally Posted by Soren

Just remember that at the time the US confirmation system was anything 'but' thorough.

Agree to a point - I think the conformation system was better in the Pacific as far as the USAAF goes. From what I understand you needed 2 witnesses and/ or gun camera, sometimes Intel team were actually sent in to look for the wreck. I won't beat a paycheck on the over-all accuracy but I think the picture did show that with P-39s and P-40s the USAAF and the RAAF were able to hold their own and them some against the Japanese.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

From what I understand you needed 2 witnesses and/ or gun camera,

No that was only later on, and gun-camera footage was never a requirement, it was always welcome however.

sometimes Intel team were actually sent in to look for the wreck.

Well that is pretty much true for every airforce back then, with some many times even requiring it - the Luftwaffe. The JAAF and IJN from time to time also sent out a search 'if' the situation allowed it.


In any case I pretty much agree with you FLYBOYJ, the P-40 didn't make a fool out of itself in the pacific, it did a good job against a technically superior foe and for that you can admire the plane and the pilots who flew her.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

In any case I pretty much agree with you FLYBOYJ, the P-40 didn't make a fool out of itself in the pacific, it did a good job against a technically superior foe and for that you can admire the plane and the pilots who flew her.

Agree, and I think that many were made to think that flying a P-39 or a P-40 in the Pacific in mid 1942 was an automatic death sentance, I think history proved otherwise...

[Soren]

I agree completely.

[FLYBOYJ]

This was from Wikipedia..

"South West Pacific Area P-40 squadrons were slaughtered by Japanese fighters like the Ki-43 "Oscar" and the A6M Zero in the first major battles at Pearl Harbor, the Philippines and in the Dutch East Indies. But in later battles improved tactics and training allowed the strengths of the aicraft to be more effectively utilized, enabling often outnmbered P-40 squadrons to hang on against heavy odds, and eventually triumph over the IJN and the JAAF.

The 49th Fighter Group was one of the most important U.S. fighter groups in the South West Pacific, in action from the beginning of the war to the very end, playing a key role in the defense of Darwin, Australia and Port Morseby, New Guinea. The 49th flew P-40's until they were replaced by P-38's in 1944.

Robert Marshall DeHaven was an ace with the 49th FG, scoring 10 kills in the P-40, 14 kills overall. He compared the P-40 to the P-38:

"If you flew wisely, the P-40 was a very capable aircraft. In many conditions, it could outturn a P-38, a fact that some pilots didn't realize when they made the transition between the two aircraft. The P-40 kept me alive and allowed me to accomplish my mission. The real problem with it was lack of range. As we pushed the Japanese back, P-40 pilots were slowly left out of the war. So when I moved to P-38s, an excellent aircraft, I did so not because I believed that the P-40 was an inferior fighter, but because I knew the P-38 would allow us to reach the enemy. I was a fighter pilot and that was what I was supposed to do."

[Wildcat]

The following is taken from the book Darwins
Air War by the Aviation Historical Society Of
The Northern Territory.

The Following apply to combat with P-40's

RAID No. DATE No. of DEFENDERS (P40's) LOSSES ENEMYLOSSES
1, 19.2.42, 11, 10, 2F 3B destroyed
2B prob

6, 22.3.42, unknown amount, 0, 1F destroyed

7, 28.3.42, as above, 1 prob, 1 des. 1 dam.

8, 30.3.42, as above, 1, 1 damaged

9, 31.3.42, as above, 0, 1F des. 1B prob

12, 4.4.42, 14, 1+2crashlanded, 4F,4B destroyed
2F,1B damaged

14, 25.4.42, approx.50, 0, 3F,8B destroyed
1B damaged

15, 27.4.42, as above, 4 missing, 4F,3B destroyed
2F probable

16, 13.6.42, 36, 1+1crashlanded, 1F probable

17, 14.6.42, unknown, 1, 4F destroyed

18, 15.6.42, 28, 1+1missing, 6F destroyed
1F damaged

19, 16.6.42, 12, 3missing, 1F destroyed
2crashlanded, 1B probable

23, 28.7.42, 1, 0, 0

26, 31.7.42, 34, 1+2damaged, 6F,3B destroyed
3F,3B probable
3F,2B damaged

27, 23.8.42, 24, 1 crashed, 8F,6B destroyed
3B probable
4F damaged

35, 25.9.42, 1, 0, 0

36, 25.9.42, 1, 0, 0

37, 26.9.42, 3, 0, unknown,

38, 27.9.42, 2, 0, 0

39, 27.9.42, 1, 0, 0

40, 24.10.42, 2, 0, 0

44, 25.10.42, 4, 0, 0

46, 27.10.42, 1, 0, 0

47, 23.11.42, 1, 0, 1B destroyed
1B probable

48, 26.11.42, 1, 0, 0

49, 27.11.42, 1, 0, 0

50 20.1.43, 4, 0, 1 probable

51 21.1.43, 4, 0, 0

I cant' say how accurate these figures are but I thought they would be of interest. The losses the Japanese were taking must have been a concern because they switched from daylight to night raids after raid 27, hence the lower number of losses by the Japanese and claims by the P40's.
When they did resume daylight raids on 2.3.43, however the spitfires had arrived and soon won superiority over the Japanese. The last raid was conducted on Darwin in November 43.

[FLYBOYJ]

Great info Wildcat, again reinforcement of the P-40s actual impact.

[Gnomey]

Good stuff Wildcat!