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.
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 » 22 Nov 2023 12:49

Vicious wrote:
22 Nov 2023 02:03
Hello Fontessa,

Where did you get such details? The data I have pretty much matched what you have, yet you had more "known" tail codes/crews/etc. than my sources have turned up. There may be a couple of minor disagreements here & there only.

Was "Senshi Socho" this detailed? I haven't been privy to any significant translations of its volumes. Nor am I aware of any other source so detailed to "list" such a large amount of such information.
I posted based on various sources. The most difficult part is the tail numbers. Senshi Sosho does not have this information at all. Much of them is based on scale models, which are based on the photographs of actual airplanes. The below is from a model maker's website which shows Akagi's Kate Squadron at Pearl Harbor. It's rare to see so much together.


Akagi Kate Level Bombing AI-3xx
97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 0.jpg

Akagi Kate Torpedo Bombing AI-3xxx
97式艦攻 雷撃隊F 赤城 0.jpg

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

Vicious
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Nov 2023 01:51
Location: Pacific Ocean

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Vicious » 22 Nov 2023 19:38

Hi again Fontessa and thank you for your reply.

I have a specific scenario regarding tail codes and the crews therein for you to help me sort out if you can. The link below from j-aircraft from some time ago lays out the dilemma:

https://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.php?topic=716.0

While the newsreel film does show AI-309 and AI-316 and AI-317... (and after flipping the image of AI-309 to its correct orientation)...

The magazine here speculated (and used "?" to show it was speculation) on who was in the lead aircraft/its tail code AND likewise on the aircraft on the immediate left wing of the leader.

Regardless, these numbers are different from the ones you cited earlier in this string for the formation.

Can you shed more light on how you determined the tail codes and crew here? It is not that I don't believe you, no way, just as a fellow researcher would appreciate your sources and/or research method(s) that found out this information if you are willing to share them here. I've seen nothing like your products here in this string alone and am impressed with them, again knowing many of your tail codes (and by default crews therein) do agree with the ones I too have.

If I know who was in the photo/camera aircraft, I can probably via a crew roster for 07DEC41 figure out who his wingmen are by name and tail code if the latter is visible.

As a model builder myself and where accuracy is paramount as much as possible, I appreciate too your last post with all those model aircraft! Once again, how do you (or the model builders) know all those codes???

As an aside, I am quite familiar with the late David Aiken's work in this genre and know Sidnei Maneta's website used in the main Mr. Aiken's information for his product:

https://japanese-aviation.forumotion.co ... el-bombers


You can see here again that the tail codes for this specific formation were not known when this site was created, which implies David Aiken didn't know them either. So far, I haven't determined how David Aiken knew the tail codes he did know as seen in his published magazine article(s) which alas, have no footnotes or explanations on this. His "Torpedoeing Pearl Harbor" article has many IJN torpedo plane tail codes in it, plus who was in what aircraft too.

Appreciate your work and participation here Fontessa!

Vicious

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 Nov 2023 07:18

Vicious wrote:
22 Nov 2023 19:38
Hi again Fontessa and thank you for your reply.

I have a specific scenario regarding tail codes and the crews therein for you to help me sort out if you can. The link below from j-aircraft from some time ago lays out the dilemma:

https://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.php?topic=716.0

While the newsreel film does show AI-309 and AI-316 and AI-317... (and after flipping the image of AI-309 to its correct orientation)...

The magazine here speculated (and used "?" to show it was speculation) on who was in the lead aircraft/its tail code AND likewise on the aircraft on the immediate left wing of the leader.

Regardless, these numbers are different from the ones you cited earlier in this string for the formation.

Can you shed more light on how you determined the tail codes and crew here? It is not that I don't believe you, no way, just as a fellow researcher would appreciate your sources and/or research method(s) that found out this information if you are willing to share them here. I've seen nothing like your products here in this string alone and am impressed with them, again knowing many of your tail codes (and by default crews therein) do agree with the ones I too have.

If I know who was in the photo/camera aircraft, I can probably via a crew roster for 07DEC41 figure out who his wingmen are by name and tail code if the latter is visible.

As a model builder myself and where accuracy is paramount as much as possible, I appreciate too your last post with all those model aircraft! Once again, how do you (or the model builders) know all those codes???

As an aside, I am quite familiar with the late David Aiken's work in this genre and know Sidnei Maneta's website used in the main Mr. Aiken's information for his product:

https://japanese-aviation.forumotion.co ... el-bombers


You can see here again that the tail codes for this specific formation were not known when this site was created, which implies David Aiken didn't know them either. So far, I haven't determined how David Aiken knew the tail codes he did know as seen in his published magazine article(s) which alas, have no footnotes or explanations on this. His "Torpedoeing Pearl Harbor" article has many IJN torpedo plane tail codes in it, plus who was in what aircraft too.

Appreciate your work and participation here Fontessa!

Vicious

I visited USJ (United Studio Japan) on the 24th and 25th of this month. It was the first weekend of the Christmas Season, so the park was packed, even though there were no same-day tickets on sale. The reason this post was delayed is because of this "Yokohama - Osaka Great Trip"...

I'm sorry that I can't answer all your questions. The data for my previous post was pulled from the site of a model manufacturer called HIGH-GEARed. He doesn't cite the source, but it seems like the results are pretty hard to come by.

I have some doubts about the two posts you showed as shown in Figure 1. Were the two photo groups posted by Sidnei Maneta taken of the same comppany? The Japanese magazine "Pearl Harbor Attack Force 真珠湾攻撃隊" published by Model Art Company includes painted pictures that were researched by military researcher Oshio Kazuhiko 押尾一彦. I think this is reliable enough, so I would like to use these pictures as a basis. All of them, and another magazine painting picture of AI-316 are shown in Figure 2. The cowling display shows that the latter is based on his AI-316 photo #1.

The composition of Akagi Squadron at the time of the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor is described in the IJN's document "Akagi Air Squadrons Action Report 赤城飛行機隊行動調書." The action Report of Kate Level Bombing Squadron is shown in Figure 4, but it is shown in a more clear form in Senshi Sosho Vol.10 "Operation Hawaii ハワイ作戦". Figure 5 shows the composition of the Akagi Kate Level Bombing Squadron with tail codes researched by Oshio. HIGH-GEARed says AI-309 is the second aircraft of 44th Platoon, but from the photo AI-309 photo#1 it seems to be the third aircraft of the 44th Patoon.

My first question, "Are the two photo groups posted by Sidnei Maneta taken of the same platoon?" is because of Figure 5. Once again, these are based on the basic idea that Kazuhiko Oshio's research is correct.

97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 001B.jpg

97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 002A.jpg

モデルアート.jpg

赤城戦闘機隊 行動調書 99.jpg

97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 001D.jpg

fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by fontessa on 28 Nov 2023 00:10, edited 3 times in total.

COmentator
Member
Posts: 220
Joined: 25 Oct 2023 14:28
Location: USA

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by COmentator » 27 Nov 2023 11:25

thank you a excellent post :welcome: :thumbsup: :milwink:

Vicious
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Nov 2023 01:51
Location: Pacific Ocean

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Vicious » 28 Nov 2023 16:22

Hi Fontessa,

I'm on travel so will give a more quality reply to your latest post here likely this weekend.

Regardless, I think we have hit that dilemma of Japanese vs western Sources for detailed information, specifically the language "barrier".

The English speaking world is not privy to Japanese language sources all that much. I'm sure the vice-versa has an impact too. But the few Japanese sources have proven pretty detailed and accurate in this small segment of history: who flew in what aircraft and did what some 80 years ago.

I have seen excellent "Model Art" and "Koku Fan" pictorials.They have also published articles by Japanese Veterans, which may be the ONLY place any individual veterans stories are at. With the ability to translate with a cell phone they are becoming rich sources of information for those English-speakers/readers. Likewise, a Japanese aftermarket decal company called "MYK" has produced tail code assignments I've never seen before.

Interestingly, one of David Aiken's articles and his information on tail codes was published in Japanese in 1990-1991! As I mentioned earlier, he is very likely Sidnei's source of information on tail codes/crew assignments.

While this is small sliver of history, it makes artists, model makers, historians and those interested in this era have a more rich appreciation of it and may even provide light on something long lost to history.

Regards,

Vicious

COmentator
Member
Posts: 220
Joined: 25 Oct 2023 14:28
Location: USA

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by COmentator » 08 Dec 2023 01:45

Pearl Harbor and Wake Island were attacked the same day but because of the International Date line pearl harbor is 7 december 1941 and Wake island is 8 December 1941! Beleive It or Not :milwink: :thumbsup: :welcome:

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 » 09 Dec 2023 06:16

COmentator wrote:
08 Dec 2023 01:45
Pearl Harbor and Wake Island were attacked the same day but because of the International Date line pearl harbor is 7 december 1941 and Wake island is 8 December 1941! Beleive It or Not :milwink: :thumbsup: :welcome:
南洋部隊 Southern Force of the 4th Fleet carried out the Wake Landing Operation on December 8, Tokyo time, but it failed. The 2nd landing operation succeeded with the help of the 2nd Air Squadron on December 23, Tokyo time.

Wake Capture 1.jpg

Wake Capture 2.jpg

真珠湾 航路.jpg

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

Vicious
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Nov 2023 01:51
Location: Pacific Ocean

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Vicious » 12 Dec 2023 20:40

Hello Fontessa,

Life kept me busy longer than anticipated. I also wanted to go over the issue at hand in a quality manner for this post.

First, lets revisit Sidnei's website location on Akagi's high-level bombers which is a good place to start (and saves me a lot of work!):

https://japanese-aviation.forumotion.co ... el-bombers

And from j-aircraft:

https://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.ph ... #msg109087

Now I don't have "the answesr" to any of this, but just want to figure out who was in what aircraft on 07DEC41 as best as can be determined. I have no problem being "corrected" or just having a good dialog with theories.

So here are some "givens" as I see them now:

1. Your roster of crew names above matches pretty closely with the one I have from another source. The family names match almost exactly with a handful of differences in first names.

2. I believe LT Furukawa of the 44th Shotai/Platoon was the only cameraman with motion picture camera/film in Akagi's high-level bomber formation of 15 aircraft. (Is there any evidence that LT Iwasaki in the 42nd shotai/platoon had one?)

3. I believe LT Furukawa, facing aft, shot his movie film (later part of a newsreel) by looking to port (his aircraft's left side) and saw 2 B5N@'s, the one furthest out is "AI-309" (with no shotaicho markings). The nearest to the camera B5N2 doesn't have its code number in view.

4. LT Furukawa then shot some film looking still aft, but now off his starboard side (his aircraft's right side). He captures "AI-316" off the right wing (number"16" on cowling lower lip) and "AI-317" further off in right echelon on" AI-316" right wing. You can see "AI-317" on both the tail and "17" under the wing...BUT you cannot see "AI-316"'s tail. Thus how do we know "AI-316" was flown by another shotaicho?

There is a lot of art and a lot of declarations that "AI-316" was flown by a shotaicho but no photographic proof. If it was flown by a shotaicho, which would have to be by the 45th shotai/platoon leader, FPO2 Takizawa.

Then this implies the 44th shotai/platoon 3-ship flight was in left echelon off leader FPO1 Sakai (with LT Furukawa/cameraman in the observers seat) and his two wingmen being the unknown number with "AI-309" further out on the left side. Therefore off in right echelon was the 45th shotai/platoon of "AI-316 and AI-317" flown by FPO2 Takizawa and FPO2 Okada respectively.

Here lies a rub:

a. Again, no view of the tail markings (shotaicho?) for "AI-316" from this 07DEC41 film

b. There IS film of "AI-316" taking off from Akagi at what appears to be during early 1942 (Indian Ocean?). The paint is peeling like seen in a similar "AI-301" (Fuchida's aircraft) sequence...

But note there is NO shotaicho markings in these screen shots from the film of "AI-316" taking off attached here (I got these from a documentary on the American History Channel).

It is very possible two different planes were marked with/without shtaicho markings and/or crews changed planes after 07DEC41 and the like.

This is enough to chew on for now. I'd appreciate your thoughts and ideas plus those of anyone else with details on this issue.

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

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 » 13 Dec 2023 16:15

Vicious wrote:
12 Dec 2023 20:40
Hello Fontessa,

Life kept me busy longer than anticipated. I also wanted to go over the issue at hand in a quality manner for this post.

First, lets revisit Sidnei's website location on Akagi's high-level bombers which is a good place to start (and saves me a lot of work!):

https://japanese-aviation.forumotion.co ... el-bombers

And from j-aircraft:

https://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.ph ... #msg109087

Now I don't have "the answesr" to any of this, but just want to figure out who was in what aircraft on 07DEC41 as best as can be determined. I have no problem being "corrected" or just having a good dialog with theories.

So here are some "givens" as I see them now:

1. Your roster of crew names above matches pretty closely with the one I have from another source. The family names match almost exactly with a handful of differences in first names.

2. I believe LT Furukawa of the 44th Shotai/Platoon was the only cameraman with motion picture camera/film in Akagi's high-level bomber formation of 15 aircraft. (Is there any evidence that LT Iwasaki in the 42nd shotai/platoon had one?)

3. I believe LT Furukawa, facing aft, shot his movie film (later part of a newsreel) by looking to port (his aircraft's left side) and saw 2 B5N@'s, the one furthest out is "AI-309" (with no shotaicho markings). The nearest to the camera B5N2 doesn't have its code number in view.

4. LT Furukawa then shot some film looking still aft, but now off his starboard side (his aircraft's right side). He captures "AI-316" off the right wing (number"16" on cowling lower lip) and "AI-317" further off in right echelon on" AI-316" right wing. You can see "AI-317" on both the tail and "17" under the wing...BUT you cannot see "AI-316"'s tail. Thus how do we know "AI-316" was flown by another shotaicho?

There is a lot of art and a lot of declarations that "AI-316" was flown by a shotaicho but no photographic proof. If it was flown by a shotaicho, which would have to be by the 45th shotai/platoon leader, FPO2 Takizawa.

Then this implies the 44th shotai/platoon 3-ship flight was in left echelon off leader FPO1 Sakai (with LT Furukawa/cameraman in the observers seat) and his two wingmen being the unknown number with "AI-309" further out on the left side. Therefore off in right echelon was the 45th shotai/platoon of "AI-316 and AI-317" flown by FPO2 Takizawa and FPO2 Okada respectively.

Here lies a rub:

a. Again, no view of the tail markings (shotaicho?) for "AI-316" from this 07DEC41 film

b. There IS film of "AI-316" taking off from Akagi at what appears to be during early 1942 (Indian Ocean?). The paint is peeling like seen in a similar "AI-301" (Fuchida's aircraft) sequence...

But note there is NO shotaicho markings in these screen shots from the film of "AI-316" taking off attached here (I got these from a documentary on the American History Channel).

It is very possible two different planes were marked with/without shtaicho markings and/or crews changed planes after 07DEC41 and the like.

This is enough to chew on for now. I'd appreciate your thoughts and ideas plus those of anyone else with details on this issue.

Vicious
Thanks for the comment.

As for AI-309 and AI-316 / Ai-317, I couldn’t see only the latter. I have never seen a movie in which both were shown consecutively. If such a movie exists, my previous post was wrong.

I'm also quite busy, so I'd like to comment on the photos of AI-316 you showed. When I saw them, I felt something was wrong. The way the vertical tail code is drawn is "sloppy". At last, I found the same image on Aiken's site.
https://japanese-aviation.forumotion.co ... ril-5-1942

As you may have guessed, these are from the Ceylon raid on April 5, 1942, and he identifies it as "AI-316 with Shotaicho Belt." Regarding the two Kate vertical stabilizers, I think the code in the photo you showed was probably added later. If we look closely at the vertical stabilizer in Aikin's photo, we can see faint letters. I think the movie staff added it maybe with good intentions. But even if with good intentions, this shouldn't happen. . . I also think they couldn’t understand the meaning of "Shotaicho Belt", and did nothing about it. . .

97艦攻 赤城 AI-316 A.jpg

97艦攻 赤城 AI-316 B.jpg

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

Vicious
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Nov 2023 01:51
Location: Pacific Ocean

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Vicious » 13 Dec 2023 17:22

Hi Fontessa and thanks for your reply.

Yes, it is an assumption than only LT Furukawa had a movie camera flying with the high level bombers. If it is KNOWN that there was another one in use and as part of Akagi's high level bombers, that would be illustrative.

I totally forgot that Sidnei had "AI-316" later in his website, the same images I got from the TV documentary...Thanks for the reminder!

Agreed, the font of "AI-316" in the later Indian Ocean Operations photos looks funny or crude in its application, just as you suggested it may be a doctored film. I do not see any shotaicho stripe in the images either... (If it was there, it wold be red like the tail code font or possibly yellow, both of which would show up in these images).


What may help in this mini-mystery back to the newsreel film taken (by LT Furukawa?) on 07DEC41 is:

1. Did the Japanese have standard formations? Specifically in these 5-plane formations (2 shotai's/platoons; one a 3-plane and the other a 2-plane)

a. Did the first shotai/platoon be the leader and his two wingman, one on each side of the leader? OR were both wingmen in say LEFT Echelon off the leader's left or port wing?

b.Depending on (a) above, where did the second shotai/platoon fly off of the first shotai/platoon? Would they have one aircraft on either side of the first shotai? Or wold they be in say RIGHT Echelon off of the leaders right or starboard wing?


2. Was the "Master Bombardier" in each 5-plane formation always off the leader's left/port wing until their lead-change in the target area? (As you are likely aware, the best bombardier wasn't in the flight leaders aircraft on 07DEC41 so Dash-1 and Dash-2 would "swap the lead" when it was time to prepare to drop bombs together in formation). (You had a graphic showing this lead change with the "Master Bombardier" always on the leader's left/port wing before they swapped the lead).


3. How sure can we be that EVERY aircraft flown by a shotaicho had the applicable shotaicho markings on their aircraft on 07DEC41, in this case "AI-316"? Said marking in this case would be a bar painted under the tail code on the vertical stabilizer.

I SUSPECT the Japanese planning for this raid was so detailed that formations were standardized AND so were the markings on applicable aircraft.

BUT is there any research documentation proving this? Can we site more than one example of the formation issues above that prove a theory of their standardization?

How do we know "AI-316" has a shotaicho bar/stripe below ts tail code bedsides assuming a shotaicho flew in that aircraft?

I realize these detailed questions may never be answered at all or to any specificity. Reasoned speculation may be all we have today to use.

I guess this is research trying to "peel the onion" one more level, if there is one!

Thank you again Fontessa for your participation here.

By all means, if others have any information or reasoned speculation to add, please do so.

Regards,

Vicious

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 » 14 Dec 2023 18:33

Vicious wrote:
13 Dec 2023 17:22

What may help in this mini-mystery back to the newsreel film taken (by LT Furukawa?) on 07DEC41 is:

1. Did the Japanese have standard formations? Specifically in these 5-plane formations (2 shotai's/platoons; one a 3-plane and the other a 2-plane)

a. Did the first shotai/platoon be the leader and his two wingman, one on each side of the leader? OR were both wingmen in say LEFT Echelon off the leader's left or port wing?

b.Depending on (a) above, where did the second shotai/platoon fly off of the first shotai/platoon? Would they have one aircraft on either side of the first shotai? Or wold they be in say RIGHT Echelon off of the leaders right or starboard wing?


2. Was the "Master Bombardier" in each 5-plane formation always off the leader's left/port wing until their lead-change in the target area? (As you are likely aware, the best bombardier wasn't in the flight leaders aircraft on 07DEC41 so Dash-1 and Dash-2 would "swap the lead" when it was time to prepare to drop bombs together in formation). (You had a graphic showing this lead change with the "Master Bombardier" always on the leader's left/port wing before they swapped the lead).


3. How sure can we be that EVERY aircraft flown by a shotaicho had the applicable shotaicho markings on their aircraft on 07DEC41, in this case "AI-316"? Said marking in this case would be a bar painted under the tail code on the vertical stabilizer.

I SUSPECT the Japanese planning for this raid was so detailed that formations were standardized AND so were the markings on applicable aircraft.

BUT is there any research documentation proving this? Can we site more than one example of the formation issues above that prove a theory of their standardization?

How do we know "AI-316" has a shotaicho bar/stripe below ts tail code bedsides assuming a shotaicho flew in that aircraft?

I realize these detailed questions may never be answered at all or to any specificity. Reasoned speculation may be all we have today to use.

I guess this is research trying to "peel the onion" one more level, if there is one!

Thank you again Fontessa for your participation here.

By all means, if others have any information or reasoned speculation to add, please do so.

Regards,

Vicious
I would like to explain the IJN level bombing procedure.

Both Kate and Betty carried out level bombing by Chutai (a Company consisted of 9 airplanes). During the first wave attack on Pearl Harbor, consideration was given to how to allocate the Kates of the 1st and 2nd Air Squadrons to level bombing and torpedo bombing, and how to organize each of them, and it was decided that Kate, whose targets were battleships, would be organized into five aircraft. The level bombing of the second wave attack was carried out by the 5th Air Squadron, which had just been formed and was considered inferior. They were given "less important" ground facilities as targets. They therefore formed their formation in companies (9 airplanes) as standard. The figure below shows Shokaku's 1st company formation. The formations of the 2nd and 3rd companies were the same. The timing of a company’s bomb release was determined by the lead aircraft. The remaining planes see this and release their bombs one by one. Meanwhile, the formation continues to advance, and the bombs land in an inverted triangle. If one or two of these hit the target, it was considered a "success." In Japanese, the first plane was called “嚮導機 Koudoki.'' The Kanji 嚮導 means “lead” or “teach” I translated it as "Master Bombardier", but "Leading Airplane" might have been better. As you can see from this description, the "Leading Airplane" was the most skilled crew plane in the company. The pilot must handle the plane as directed by the bomber in the 2nd seat, and once the plane is on a bombing course, he must maintain the same course and speed until the bomb is released. As for B-17, the bombardier piloted the plane until the bombing with Norden Bombsight. Similarly, the second seater uses the pilot to "control" the plane. A company commander (usually an officer) can not do such difficult work, so a pair of highly skilled non-commissioned officers - usually on the second plane - did it. For this to be successful, the two NCOs must breathe in perfect harmony. I've heard that they were transferred as a pair when transferred. In the first wave of attacks, level bombing was done with 5 planes instead of a company of 9 planes, but the 2nd plane took the lead for the same reason.

According to CDR Fuchita’s recollection, the exchange of positions between the 1st and the 2nd planes took place as follows. I think this was probably standard procedure.
(1) His Kate (the 1st plane) lowered the altitude. (2) The 2nd plane proceeded to the position of the 1st plane. (3) The 1st plane decelerates to move backward, then climbs up and moves to the 2nd plane position. In this way, lateral movement was minimal.

The target-hit ratio of level bombing at Pearl Harbor was about 10% by dropping 800kg AP bombs from an altitude of 3000m and under favorable conditions where the target didn’t move and there was no interception by U.S., fighters aircraft. When Bettys and Nells sunk Prince of Wales and Repulse, a total of 34 500kg and 250kg AP bombs were dropped, and only three bombs hit the targets. Despite the favorable conditions in which the targets were moving but not intercepted by R.N. fighters, the AP bombs did little to save lives. The targets were sunk by torpedo bombing. As expected, IJN has abolished level bombing after this point. The U.S. Navy had not originally considered such an inefficient attack procedure.

真珠湾 水平爆撃ドクトリン.jpg

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

Vicious
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Nov 2023 01:51
Location: Pacific Ocean

Re: IJN Aircraft losses 7 December 1941

Post by Vicious » 14 Dec 2023 20:24

Hi Fontessa,

I greatly appreciate your replies here, especially the effort you put in with detail and graphics to support your points.

If you ever need a break from these things I bring up, by all means do so!

Moving on...

The part of your last post I am focusing on is this:

According to CDR Fuchita’s recollection, the exchange of positions between the 1st and the 2nd planes took place as follows. I think this was probably standard procedure.
(1) His Kate (the 1st plane) lowered the altitude. (2) The 2nd plane proceeded to the position of the 1st plane. (3) The 1st plane decelerates to move backward, then climbs up and moves to the 2nd plane position. In this way, lateral movement was minimal.

Questions:

1. Is the "second plane position", the one with the "Master Bombardier" in it, ALWAYS on the 1st planes or the shotaicho's LEFT WING?

Regardless of left or right side of the second plane...

2. How did the attached additional 2-plane shotai fly formation off the leader of the 3-plane shotai to make it a 5-plane formation?

a. Was one plane each of the second 2-plane shotai off of each wing of the first shotai? A "V" formation with the second shotai's planes on either end of the "V"?

b. Did the first/lead shotai fly in say left echelon (all his planes are on the leaders left wing) and the second shotai thus flew in right echelon off the wing of the leader of the first shotai?


Akagi 5-plane.png


Options:

A. Is AI-316 and AI-317 in the SECOND (45th) shotai, with AI-322, Unknown and AI-309 in the FIRST (44th) shotai?

OR

B. Is AI-322/LT Furukawa, "Unknown" and AI-316 in the First (44th) shotai with therefore AI-309 and AI-317 the Second (45th) shotai?

If we can prove and/or agree that AI-316 IS a shotaicho of the Second/45th shotai (and even has the applicable markings?) , THEN Option A above is correct.

Also, is the "Unknown" the "Master Bombardier"?



What this mind-bending exercise (missing many pieces) perhaps accomplishes is:

- Standardization for Japanese formation(s) used at Pearl Harbor (what 2nd shotai flies where off what wing and who the "Master Bombardier" was, which is the first shotai's number 2 aircraft...always off the left wing?

- With such standardization, known tail codes and an accurate aircrew roster (I believe we do have it, including flight/shotai positions), we then have a key to unlock who flew in what plane by tail code (maybe) and in which position in the formation. Not just in this example, but in many if not all of them!

As a former US Naval Aviator, such standardization and/or adherence to a briefed mission is always a huge factor in who flies where and does what. Is it possible the doctrine or briefings, etc., for 07DEC41 (and later?) that the IJN aviators used is KNOWN?

Regards,

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

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 » 24 Dec 2023 00:18

Vicious wrote:
14 Dec 2023 20:24
1. Is the "second plane position", the one with the "Master Bombardier" in it, ALWAYS on the 1st planes or the shotaicho's LEFT WING?
The "Master Bombardier" was located in the shotaicho's LEFT WING (number 1) except when bombing.


Vicious wrote:
14 Dec 2023 20:24
Regardless of left or right side of the second plane...
The below figure shows ”V Formation”. Isn't the way numbers are assigned the same all over the world? Please note that every Chutai consisted of one Shotai consisting of 3 planes and another Shotai consisting of 2 planes. That's because the Chutai could form "V Formation." It is clear Master Bombardier" didn’t position in the 4th plane position.

97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 003.jpg

This composition is based on the 飛行機隊戦闘行動調書 Air Unit Action Report created by IJN. I believe it is true except for my Kanji miss-reading. Kanji reading is difficult even for native Japanese.
97艦攻 水平爆撃隊 赤城 02.jpg


Vicious wrote:
14 Dec 2023 20:24
2. How did the attached additional 2-plane shotai fly formation off the leader of the
3-plane shotai to make it a 5-plane formation?
a. Was one plane each of the second 2-plane shotai off of each wing of the first shotai? A "V" formation with the second shotai's planes on either end of the "V"?

b. Did the first/lead shotai fly in say left echelon (all his planes are on the leaders left wing) and the second shotai thus flew in right echelon off the wing of the leader of the first shotai?

赤城 質問.jpg
Please see the above figures. The Chutai you showed (Akagi 5-plane.png) consisted of two Shotai belonging to different Chutai. I think it is impossible because Shotai swapping is unthinkable.


Vicious wrote:
14 Dec 2023 20:24
As a former US Naval Aviator, such standardization and/or adherence to a briefed mission is always a huge factor in who flies where and does what. Is it possible the doctrine or briefings, etc., for 07DEC41 (and later?) that the IJN aviators used is KNOWN?
The attack formation for each action is recorded with 飛行機隊戦闘行動調書 Air Unit Action Report. The 2nd Figure shows this.
https://www.jacar.archives.go.jp/aj/met ... L_TYPE=pdf


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

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 Dec 2023 08:38

【Additional Photo]
Before departing for Japan, the 1st Air Fleet conducted intense training in Kyushu. At the top formation is Kate's 3 Chutai (V Formation, each consisting of 5 aircraft) formation. I think 15 Kate of Akagi and Kafa's Revel Bombing Units movrd to Pearl Harbor in this V Formation.

赤城 編隊.jpg

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

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 Dec 2023 17:07

【Akagi Kate Torpedo Bombing Chutai】
Different composition.

XXX 97艦攻 雷撃隊 赤城 001D XXX.jpg

97式艦攻 雷撃隊形 赤城.jpg

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

Return to “Japan at War 1895-1945”