IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Discussions on all aspects of the Japanese Empire, from the capture of Taiwan until the end of the Second World War.
Rob Stuart
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 00:41
Location: Ottawa

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Rob Stuart » 24 Sep 2023 23:54

glenn239 wrote:
23 Sep 2023 20:23
... We are talking currently about historical figures and their capacity to lie, in this case Iizuka, and in that case Fuchida. My doctrine, to put it bluntly, is that it is too easy for historians to say this or that person is lying in order to smooth over a difficulty in their pet theory or narrative. This is a powerful tool which should be used as sparingly as possible, because if abused the reason is that the author is no longer writing history, they are drafting a bad a movie script in which characters act to advance the plot, not because of their character's core motivations. Conversely, if a way can be found to reconcile the historical narrative to as few lies as possible, chances are this version is true. Yet, often historical figures do lie, so when it is decided there was a lie, there must be a coherent reason given for that person to have lied.
You are again arguing that when a historical figure says that X happened at a certain place and time, then he is either:

(1) Lying, or
(2) Providing an accurate and reliable account.

Why can't you acknowledge that there is another possibility:

(3) The person in question is not lying but his account is inaccurate for other reasons.

So, here it is: Do you agree that people who are not lying can offer an account of an historical event which contains one or more errors?

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5845
Joined: 29 Apr 2005 01:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by glenn239 » 25 Sep 2023 21:30

fontessa wrote:
24 Sep 2023 03:35
Based on my past experience, I feel that you only see what you want.
When there are two possibilities, and the way I do it, I reckon with either being correct. In this instance, either Akagi had a big group of planes on deck, or not, time will tell. We're putting in time until the details of the survey of Akagi's debris field is completed in some number of years, plus a full detailed report on the survey just completed. You have concluded Iizuka is a liar. I haven't. There are two possibilities and the battlefield itself will tell which one is true.
Let me show you an example, Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書. I believe this is an original. But you keep insisting that this Akagi’s is not an original.
You asked how Iizuka's account could be possible, so I told you - there would have to have been an error in the record keeping based on the fact the ship was destroyed by fires shortly after being bombed. That doesn't mean your conclusions are false, merely that I'm not willing to make any final conclusions as of yet. You say Akagi's records are scruffier than Kaga's and contain some amount of information that must have been recovered from the battle. I already know that from years back; Akagi's fuel usage for its Midway strike is in the Nagumo Report, and that's they type of detail that could not be assembled later.
Anyway, I want you to answer my questions now.
I asked you two questions. First, which Akagi pilots do you think make up the 3 earmarked for the escort mission based on your analysis of the Akagi fighter pilot records? Second, who is the pilot listed as "Tadao" in Akagi fighter group A7A at 0932?

Below is the Akagi flight crew who was added to Akagi Val Unit for Midway Operation. You say someone is a fake of Iizuka.
Iizuka according to his own account was not "added" to the Akagi Val squadron, he was a member of it. You say he "must have" transferred off in April 1942.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5845
Joined: 29 Apr 2005 01:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by glenn239 » 25 Sep 2023 21:52

Rob Stuart wrote:
24 Sep 2023 23:54
So, here it is: Do you agree that people who are not lying can offer an account of an historical event which contains one or more errors?
Of course. What the chances are of such errors depends on the nature of the experience. Let me ask you three questions to explain:

1. Where were you at the moment you heard that the first tower had been hit on 9/11?
2. What did you have for dinner that same night?
3. Where were you an hour before and the hour after you heard this news?

For myself, I can answer (1) accurately and in detail. I cannot answer (2). I can answer (3) very accurately. So, in a historical account, if I said I was in New York on 9/11 when I was not, (and in fact was not), no one would believe that I had "misremembered" anything. But, if I said I had pizza that night, but actually had hamburgers, no one would be surprised at the error. So, if Iizuka says he went to Midway but did not, this is too much to be faulty memory. For Furuta, the details around the bombing of Kaga are his 9/11. These are going to be very accurate in the hour before and after this event.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 4449
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by fontessa » 25 Sep 2023 23:03

glenn239 wrote:
25 Sep 2023 21:30
fontessa wrote:
24 Sep 2023 03:35
Based on my past experience, I feel that you only see what you want.
When there are two possibilities, and the way I do it, I reckon with either being correct. In this instance, either Akagi had a big group of planes on deck, or not, time will tell. We're putting in time until the details of the survey of Akagi's debris field is completed in some number of years, plus a full detailed report on the survey just completed. You have concluded Iizuka is a liar. I haven't. There are two possibilities and the battlefield itself will tell which one is true.
Let me show you an example, Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書. I believe this is an original. But you keep insisting that this Akagi’s is not an original.
You asked how Iizuka's account could be possible, so I told you - there would have to have been an error in the record keeping based on the fact the ship was destroyed by fires shortly after being bombed. That doesn't mean your conclusions are false, merely that I'm not willing to make any final conclusions as of yet. You say Akagi's records are scruffier than Kaga's and contain some amount of information that must have been recovered from the battle. I already know that from years back; Akagi's fuel usage for its Midway strike is in the Nagumo Report, and that's they type of detail that could not be assembled later.
Anyway, I want you to answer my questions now.
I asked you two questions. First, which Akagi pilots do you think make up the 3 earmarked for the escort mission based on your analysis of the Akagi fighter pilot records? Second, who is the pilot listed as "Tadao" in Akagi fighter group A7A at 0932?

Below is the Akagi flight crew who was added to Akagi Val Unit for Midway Operation. You say someone is a fake of Iizuka.
Iizuka according to his own account was not "added" to the Akagi Val squadron, he was a member of it. You say he "must have" transferred off in April 1942.
There are only two certain facts:
(1) Iizuka writes in his reminiscences that he was on board the Akagi at Midway.
(2) Iizuka is not listed in Akagi's 飛行機隊行動調書 at Midway.
When ordinary people see this, they think, "Iizuka isn't telling the truth.'' I thought so, and so did Eugen. But you insist "Akagi's 飛行機隊行動調書 is wrong, so Iizuka is not included in it. The current 飛行機隊行動調書 has been restored. So Iizawa must have dropped during the restoration." I have told you many times in a roundabout way, "That's unnatural, it's impossible,'' but you stuck to it. So I said "You only see what you want to see.'' You often require me to "clarify the names of the three pilots'', but the only way to do that is to use the Akagi's 飛行機隊行動調書 which you decided "wrong". Don't you notice your own contradictions? The landing time may be wrong. The take-off time may be wrong. The landing time may be wrong. The pilot's name may also be wrong. and and and... Because Akagi's 飛行機隊行動調書 is wrong. Do you think the results obtained in this way are valid? I don't think so. And I don't think I can have a meaningful discussion with you who "only sees what you want to see.''


glenn239 wrote:
25 Sep 2023 21:30
Below is the Akagi flight crew who was added to Akagi Val Unit for Midway Operation. You say someone is a fake of Iizuka.
Iizuka according to his own account was not "added" to the Akagi Val squadron, he was a member of it. You say he "must have" transferred off in April 1942.
Looks like you need more kind advice.
Comparing the Akagi Val crew at the attack against HMS Hermes on 9 April 1942 and the Akagi Val crew at Midway on 5 June 1942, 26 crew was the same. So the following 10 members were added newly.
 SFPO Nagaoseki Heiichi 長小関平一 (Pilot)
 LTJG Motoyama Shigeyuki 本山泰之 (2nd Seater) KIA on 24 August 1942
 FPO1 Yamada Misaku 山田己作 (Pilot)
 FPO2 Matsuo Tsutomu 松尾勉 (2nd Seater)
 FPO2 Kato Masaya 加藤政也 (Pilot)
 FPO3 Onuma Chozaburo 大沼長三郎 (2nd Seater)
 FPO1 Kawano Takushi 河野卓士 (Pilot)
 FPO3 Hasegawa Kikunisuke 長谷川菊之助 (2nd Seater)
 ENS Sato Chiaki 斉藤千秋 (2nd Seater)
 FPO2 Horie Kazuhisa 堀江一光 (2nd Seater)
You claim that Iizuka was on board Akagi until Midway. This means that his name was miswritten to one of the above 10 crew when Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 was restored. Can you point out to who, did Iizuka become by mistake? In order to make a serious claim such as Akagi飛行機隊行動調書 was miswritten, it is necessary to point out Iizuka was miswritten to who. Without it, your claim is, just said in Japanese, いいがかり a false charge.

fontessa
Last edited by fontessa on 26 Sep 2023 13:30, edited 3 times in total.

Rob Stuart
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 00:41
Location: Ottawa

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Rob Stuart » 26 Sep 2023 06:18

glenn239 wrote:
25 Sep 2023 21:52
Rob Stuart wrote:
24 Sep 2023 23:54
So, here it is: Do you agree that people who are not lying can offer an account of an historical event which contains one or more errors?
Of course. What the chances are of such errors depends on the nature of the experience. Let me ask you three questions to explain:

1. Where were you at the moment you heard that the first tower had been hit on 9/11?
2. What did you have for dinner that same night?
3. Where were you an hour before and the hour after you heard this news?

For myself, I can answer (1) accurately and in detail. I cannot answer (2). I can answer (3) very accurately. So, in a historical account, if I said I was in New York on 9/11 when I was not, (and in fact was not), no one would believe that I had "misremembered" anything. But, if I said I had pizza that night, but actually had hamburgers, no one would be surprised at the error. So, if Iizuka says he went to Midway but did not, this is too much to be faulty memory. For Furuta, the details around the bombing of Kaga are his 9/11. These are going to be very accurate in the hour before and after this event.
I remember 9/11 fairly well, but I'm only 65 and that was only 22 years ago. When I'm 95 and 9/11 is 52 years in the past, I'm not at all sure that I'll be able to answer question about 9/11 that I can answer now. Also, that was not the only terrorist attack that's effected me. There was a more recent one here in Ottawa. I remember that a terrorist with a rifle murdered a young soldier guarding the cenotaph at the National War Memorial, then stormed into Parliament's Centre Block, shot and wounded a guard there, and then went looking for MPs to shoot. Fortunately, probably due to our gun control laws, his rifle was just a lever action Winchester and he was soon shot dead by police and the parliamentary security force. I can remember being in a government building miles away which was put on lockdown and I was not allowed to leave at quitting time, even though by then we knew that the terrorist was dead. But I had forgotten all the other details, like the time at which the incident started, the name of the terrorist and even the date. I've had to use Google tonight to confirm that this was on 22 October 2014.

Even more alarmingly for me, there was an incident where a man newly released from jail murdered three women (my recollection was that there were four) west of Ottawa and then headed for the law office where his defence lawyer worked, to murder him for "letting him" be sent to jail. My daughter was the receptionist at that law office. I remember her phoning me before the guy was caught, telling me that the police had arrived and put her building on lockdown, and that she and the rest of the staff were locked in a back room. But tonight I could not even remember what year that was (I'm not sure my daughter could either) and had to look it up. It was 22 September 2015.

When I'm 95 even the most recent of the above incidents will be about 40 years in my past. If I'm interviewed about any of them when I'm 95, I'll likely remember less than I do now and will get more details wrong, especially if when I'm 85 I see a Hollywood-style film about the incident I'm interviewed about, and incorporate misinformation from the film into my recollections.

So when you say that "if Iizuka says he went to Midway but did not, this is too much to be faulty memory", my question is "Why?", given that he was in his 90s, may have a hazy recollection of some other battle but wrongly think it was a memory from Midway, or may have been affected by innocent but mistaken assertions by others, e.g., "You were at Midway, weren't you Grandfather".

And as for your comment that for Furata "the details around the bombing of Kaga are his 9/11", are you seriously suggesting that everyone present in New York on 9/11 near the World Trade Center correctly remembers what they saw?* Do you think that they all recall which tower was hit first? I can't. (Googling it just now I see that it was the north tower. (I had thought that the two towers were the east and west towers.)) Can they all recall the times at which the two towers were hit and when each of them collapsed? When they're 95 will they even get the year right? In 2061 will some 95 year old people not present in New York on 9/11 claim that they were there, thinking that their memories of all the videos they've seen of it are memories of things they saw in person?

To sum up, it's nonsense to claim that the recollections of old men must be given more weight than other sources, especially when those other sources are credible primary sources. Your desire to promote an interpretation "which no one on Earth had worked out until I did" is colouring your assessment of the evidence.


* Addendum: I've seen just now, a few hours after first posting this response, that during its 9/11 investigation the FBI interviewed 167,000 witnesses. In 2061, how many of them might provide a different account of what they saw than they provided when interviewed by the FBI in 2001? Obviously, many of them would get important details wrong 60 years after the event. So your belief that everyone recalls accurately for the rest of their life all the details of their most traumatic experiences is delusional.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 4449
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by fontessa » 27 Sep 2023 08:01

glenn239 's claim

glenn239 claims that “Akagi 飛行隊行動調書 was restored, and incorrectly.'' It is extremely important clane, so I would like to refute the basis for it. I asked several times for clarification on the basis of this claim. Below is his answer and my rebuttal. I already stated my thought in #139.
glenn239 wrote:
23 Sep 2023 16:16
fontessa wrote:
22 Sep 2023 21:47
That's why Iizuka was on board the Akagi. So Akagi 飛行隊行動調書 which does not list him is incorrect. It was restored later having mistakes.
Yes, that the reason why Iizuka said he was with Akagi and the records do not is because the ship was sunk in a sea of catastrophic fires and this caused errors in the records. Have you not seen the pictures of the Akagi's bridge? It's ruined, it was in shambles and flames shortly after the attack. Nagumo's staff had to evacuate by a rope, the fires that gutted the bridge swept in so fast, it was that bad.
It's true that Akagi sank, but it is just your speculation that Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 sank with her. No matter how confused her bridge was, there's a possibility that someone brought it up. I can't disprove your claim, and you also can't disprove mine either. In Japan, this kind of inconclusive argument is called 水掛け論 futile controversy. In other words, what you are saying cannot be a solid basis for claiming a very important matter such as Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 was restored incorrectly.

fontessa

Eugen Pinak
Member
Posts: 1231
Joined: 16 Jun 2004 16:09
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Eugen Pinak » 27 Sep 2023 11:43

glenn239 wrote:
22 Sep 2023 00:59
If you'd bothered to read Fuchida's account entirely and not just its parts you like - you'd find out he was on the air operations bridge.
No, he wasn't. He was on the flight deck. "I did not have the power to stop this action. I was lying on the deck in a hospital gown". When the attack happened, "The bomb hit the center of the flight deck...close to where I was. I was lifted by the explosion and thrown against the flight deck at the front of the bridge
If you'd bother to read Fuchida's words you're quoting, you'd find out there was nothing in them to disprove his previous words he was on the air operations bridge ("flight command post" in the English translation)... from where he was thrown against the flight deck at the front of the bridge :)
Of course, Fuchida also claims he was NOT thrown from the bridge :wink:
glenn239 wrote:
22 Sep 2023 00:59
If you'd bothered to read Fuchida's account entirely and not just its parts you like - you'd find out this is order to _2nd_ Carrier Division. Reply to previous Yamaguchi's proposal to attack only with his unescorted D3As armed with land bombs.
It is an order to all carrier based bombers to prepare for the second attack.
Yes - an order to all D3A units to prepare for the second attack. And the only D3A units preparing for the second attack were CARDIV-2 bomber units. Just as Fuchida claims.

Rob Stuart
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 00:41
Location: Ottawa

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Rob Stuart » 27 Sep 2023 13:05

fontessa wrote:
27 Sep 2023 08:01
glenn239 's claim

glenn239 claims that “Akagi 飛行隊行動調書 was restored, and incorrectly.'' It is extremely important clane, so I would like to refute the basis for it. I asked several times for clarification on the basis of this claim. Below is his answer and my rebuttal. I already stated my thought in #139.
glenn239 wrote:
23 Sep 2023 16:16
fontessa wrote:
22 Sep 2023 21:47
That's why Iizuka was on board the Akagi. So Akagi 飛行隊行動調書 which does not list him is incorrect. It was restored later having mistakes.
Yes, that the reason why Iizuka said he was with Akagi and the records do not is because the ship was sunk in a sea of catastrophic fires and this caused errors in the records. Have you not seen the pictures of the Akagi's bridge? It's ruined, it was in shambles and flames shortly after the attack. Nagumo's staff had to evacuate by a rope, the fires that gutted the bridge swept in so fast, it was that bad.
It's true that Akagi sank, but it is just your speculation that Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 sank with her. No matter how confused her bridge was, there's a possibility that someone brought it up. I can't disprove your claim, and you also can't disprove mine either. In Japan, this kind of inconclusive argument is called 水掛け論 futile controversy. In other words, what you are saying cannot be a solid basis for claiming a very important matter such as Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 was restored incorrectly.

fontessa
Fontessa,

I agree with your point of view. I would add that the transfer of Nagumo and his staff to Nagara took place before Akagi's bridge sustained the fire damage described by Glenn, according to the description in Shattered Sword. I don't see any reason why Genda or someone else could not have taken the flight command posts logs and notes with him. Air operations aboard Akagi had obviously ceased, so there would have been no point in keeping them aboard the ship. Shattered Sword notes as well that Genda's orderly (his batman, apparently) had had the time to dash below to fetch Genda's bank book and seal from his cabin, so the transfer of the staff was not quite as chaotic as Glenn is suggesting. Furthermore, the evacuation of Akagi's crew appears to have been completed in an orderly manner, and Captain Aoki, Commander Miura (the navigator) and others who would have been on the bridge were rescued. Thus if the flight command post records had not been saved by someone on Nagumo's staff then it certainly seems possible that they (and the ordinary deck log) could have been taken off by a ship's officer. The fact that Iizuka's name is not recorded in the air operations records does not prove that the originals were lost and an error-riddled replacement produced. And in any case it's unlikely that any Val pilot actually present would have been omitted from reconstructed records. The surviving senior Val pilots would certainly have been able to provide the names of all of their aircrew to whoever reconstructed the records.

Eugen Pinak
Member
Posts: 1231
Joined: 16 Jun 2004 16:09
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Eugen Pinak » 27 Sep 2023 14:16

fontessa wrote:
27 Sep 2023 08:01
It's true that Akagi sank, but it is just your speculation that Akagi 飛行機隊行動調書 sank with her. No matter how confused her bridge was, there's a possibility that someone brought it up. I can't disprove your claim, and you also can't disprove mine either. In Japan, this kind of inconclusive argument is called 水掛け論 futile controversy.
No, this is not a "futile controversy". In English this is called "groundless claim". Because if person makes a claim, he had to present some facts to prove it. Glenn presented no such facts. And all his stories can't replace them.
I think you should know, that Glenn are trying to prove Fuchida's "Five Fatal Minutes" theory for some 10 years on various internet forums. His claims are regularly rebuffed, but he keep coming with any new fact that seems to support Fuchida's story. The funny thing is - he already "forgot" what's written by Fuchida himself, because it doesn't fit with Iizuka claims.

weiyan
Member
Posts: 146
Joined: 28 Sep 2019 07:49
Location: Shanghai

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by weiyan » 27 Sep 2023 15:31

Akagi Val Unit Changes
Pilot
KIA on 7 December 1941
FPO2 Ota Seiichi太田誠一
FPO3 Honma Kinnosuke 本間金助
FSS1 Shimakura Chuji 島倉忠治
FPO2 Goto Hajime 後藤元

Transferred from Kaga in January 1942.
FPO1 Takano Hideo 高野秀雄
FSS1 Yamagawa Mitsuyoshi 山川光好
FSS1 Aikawa Buji 芥川武志
FPO1 Akimoto Tamotsu 秋元保

Transferred in late April 1942 or May 1942.
FWO Ozeki Hirakatsu 尾関平一
FPO1 Yamada Misaku 山田己作
FPO2 Kato Masaya 加藤政也
FPO1 Kawano Takushi 河野卓士

Transferred out in late April 1942 or May 1942.
LT ABE Zenji 阿部善次 → Saiki Air Group (佐伯航空隊)
FSS1 Takei Kazuma 武居一馬 → JUNYO (隼鷹)
FSS1 Nagashima Zensaku 長島善作 → JUNYO (隼鷹)
FPO3 Iizuka Tokuji 飯塚徳次 → ?

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 4449
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by fontessa » 27 Sep 2023 16:09

Thanks Rob and Eugen. In the past, perhaps only some senior officers had the opportunity to talk about Midway. However, due to the development of IT and other technologies, NCOs, who were silent in the past, are now talking about Midway, denying the "Five Minutes of Destiny'' story. He doesn't seem able to handle these situations. and I think he hasn't grown at all since then. But that's his choice, and it's his choice to "only see what he wants to see". I don't want to deal with it anymore. However, I cannot tolerate his comments regarding the IJN document, so I expressed my two objections.

fontessa

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 4449
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by fontessa » 27 Sep 2023 17:03

weiyan wrote:
27 Sep 2023 15:31
Akagi Val Unit Changes
Pilot
KIA on 7 December 1941
FPO2 Ota Seiichi太田誠一
FPO3 Honma Kinnosuke 本間金助
FSS1 Shimakura Chuji 島倉忠治
FPO2 Goto Hajime 後藤元

Transferred from Kaga in January 1942.
FPO1 Takano Hideo 高野秀雄
FSS1 Yamagawa Mitsuyoshi 山川光好
FSS1 Aikawa Buji 芥川武志
FPO1 Akimoto Tamotsu 秋元保

Transferred in late April 1942 or May 1942.
FWO Ozeki Hirakatsu 尾関平一
FPO1 Yamada Misaku 山田己作
FPO2 Kato Masaya 加藤政也
FPO1 Kawano Takushi 河野卓士

Transferred out in late April 1942 or May 1942.
LT ABE Zenji 阿部善次 → Saiki Air Group (佐伯航空隊)
FSS1 Takei Kazuma 武居一馬 → JUNYO (隼鷹)
FSS1 Nagashima Zensaku 長島善作 → JUNYO (隼鷹)
FPO3 Iizuka Tokuji 飯塚徳次 → ?
Thanks, weiyan. Much appreciated.

I would like to correct my miss.
was; Nagaoseki Heiichi 長小関平一
is: Koseki Heiichi 小関平一

I would like to point out one more thing. I listed 10 people in #139, but in reality, we only need to pay attention to pilots. If there was a mistake in the restoration of Akagi 飛行隊行動調書, it was in the pilot's slot, because Iizukawa was a pilot. Of the 10 people I listed before, 4 were pilots.
SFPO Nagaoseki Heiichi 長小関平一 (Pilot) → Koseki Heiich小関平一
FPO1 Yamada Misaku 山田己作 (Pilot)
PO2 Kato Masaya 加藤政也 (Pilot)
PO1 Kawano Takushi 河野卓士 (Pilot)

They match the four people who Weiyan said joined in April or May of 1942. It means that Iizuka was not on board Akagi at Midway and lied in his memoirs as Eugen and I have pointed out. Moreover, glenn239's claim is baseless bullshit. I'm glad that his insults towards IJN are dismissed.

赤城爆撃隊 真の行動調書.jpg

fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Eugen Pinak
Member
Posts: 1231
Joined: 16 Jun 2004 16:09
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Eugen Pinak » 28 Sep 2023 08:15

weiyan wrote:
27 Sep 2023 15:31
Transferred from Kaga in January 1942.
FPO1 Takano Hideo 高野秀雄
FSS1 Yamagawa Mitsuyoshi 山川光好
FSS1 Aikawa Buji 芥川武志
FPO1 Akimoto Tamotsu 秋元保
Weiyan - thank you very much for those details.
Thanks to you I now know what's happened to extra aircrews during the reductions on Kido Butai air groups.

Eugen Pinak
Member
Posts: 1231
Joined: 16 Jun 2004 16:09
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Eugen Pinak » 28 Sep 2023 08:23

fontessa wrote:
27 Sep 2023 16:09
Thanks Rob and Eugen. In the past, perhaps only some senior officers had the opportunity to talk about Midway. However, due to the development of IT and other technologies, NCOs, who were silent in the past, are now talking about Midway, denying the "Five Minutes of Destiny'' story.
That's interesting. Was it really so bad for NCOs and sailors to voice their memories before development of the internet? I see, that IIzuka published his memoirs in bikers' magazine. But why it was so hard for them to publish? Because of their low status?

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 4449
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by fontessa » 28 Sep 2023 09:06

Eugen Pinak wrote:
28 Sep 2023 08:23
fontessa wrote:
27 Sep 2023 16:09
Thanks Rob and Eugen. In the past, perhaps only some senior officers had the opportunity to talk about Midway. However, due to the development of IT and other technologies, NCOs, who were silent in the past, are now talking about Midway, denying the "Five Minutes of Destiny'' story.
That's interesting. Was it really so bad for NCOs and sailors to voice their memories before development of the internet? I see, that IIzuka published his memoirs in bikers' magazine. But why it was so hard for them to publish? Because of their low status?
Well, I might have said too much. No problem, I'll take it down for now.

fontessa

Return to “Japan at War 1895-1945”