Which tactics are best?

[Bombardier101]

Which nation's tactics do you think are best?

What's so good about their tactics?

[stiz]

they all there good sides and bad sides  ;)

[dcunning30]

US by far!!!!

First of all, the Thatch Weave was a simple, yet brilliant solution to counter the more nimble Zero.  Navy and Marine pilots use the the Thatch Weave up until the end of the war.  The Finger 4 and echelon were superior formations than what the Japanese used, a flight of 3 similar to early British fighter formations.

Also, Japanese combattants were too given to Bushido which ended up having them quick to go down in a blazing glory rather than try to live to fight another day.

Also, the Japanese were plagued at all levels by complex planning and rigid execution.  In contrast, Americans were much more willing to improvise as necessary.

To illustrate this last point, there was a famous Guadalcanal mission commanded by Joe Foss.  There is now a famous painting depicting this mission.  A very large Japanese formation was heading toward Guadalcanal.  Foss took up his flight of F4's and some army P38's.  Their flight of 12 planes were hopelessly outnumbered.  Foss had them duck in and out of clouds all over the sky in an attempt to make it look like their numbers were more than what it actually was.  The Japanese never attacked, but after some time, just turned around and flew back to Rabaul.

What was learned after the war was the Japanese had a decoy formation.  Only when the Americans attacked the decoy, would other formations attack the Americans, and the bombers would work over Henderson unmolested.  Well, since Foss never went after the decoy, the Japanese, paralized with rigidity, never executed the next step of their attack, and after their fuel ran low, just turned around and flew back to Rabaul.

Here's that painting:
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/cactus/paint_9.htm

[dcunning30]

But another thing, at the start of the war, the Japanese pilots were some of the most skilled pilots in the world, flying some of the best planes in the world.  The Zero was more than a match to anything the Americans could put up against it.  The Kate was a stable level bombing and torpedo platform, dropping arguably one of the best, if not the best torpedo in the war and the Val was a stable dive bombing platform.

However, as those who have studied this stuff know, the Japanese had serious flaws in their doctrine.  Their fixation on the attack led them to build aircraft that sacrificed defensive technologies to favor attack technologies.  The Betty bomber was nicknamed the "Flying Zippo" because the Japanese didn't consider it important to use armor and self-sealing fuel tanks in their planes.

The Zero was a nimble plane, but you just needed to get a few good shots in, and it was done for.  It's airframe was light and there was no armor for the pilot and no self sealing fuel tanks.  Contrast that to the F4 Wildcat.  It had a very rugged airframe, self sealing fuel tanks and armor for the pilot.  In his book, Samurai, Saburo Sakai mentioned how he worked over a Wildcat over Guadalcanal really bad.  He saw how pathetic the pilot looked and spared him.  If my memory serves me correctly, that was a Navy Wildcat and the pilot's name was Pugh.  But that was a testement to the ruggedness of the Wildcat.  If you drew smoke from a Zero over Guadalcanal, there stood a very good chance it wasn't making it back to Rabaul.

[dcunning30]

I remember reading, during the air war over Japan in 1945, the Japanese Army developed techniques of ramming B-Sans (the name Japanese gave the B29)  These were not intended to be suicide missions, the pilots were expected to bail out - with mixed results, both in successful attacks and survivability of the pilots.

[ozzy72]

You have to remember that most of the US tactics were from RAF experience (particularly from Eagle Sqn. pilots who went directly into the USAAF), you have to remember that most of the RAF experience came from watching the Germans.
You can't say anyone is better than the other without appearing to be an ignoramous. No-one had better tactics, they just went with what they had and adapted accordingly...
But the Soviets weren't all that hot, by the time of Korea they'd learnt all the lessons of WWII

[dcunning30]

I disagree. most of the tactics used against Japan were from pre-existing fighter doctrine, the experience of the Flying Tigers and seat-of-the-pants trial and error.  For example, the Thatch Weave was invented on the back of a napkin by Jimmy Thatch.  If you read biographies of various aces in the Pacific War, they'll at some time or another mention that they learned the tactics works against  the enemy by just engaging them and surviving the engagements.

[dcunning30]

I think the discussion of tactics can be expanded into a general discussion of diverging doctrines and conduct during the war.  For example, originally, when the Japanese conquerored a land, they attempted to implement a policy of "Asia for asians".  But unfortunately, it ended up descending into a practice of brutality.  Now, this brutality toward various islanders was just an extension of brutality within the ranks of the Japanese Army.  Officers routinely brutalized conscripts for some of the most minor offenses.  Such matter of course gives a degree of explaination for events such as tThe Bataan Death March and the Rape of Nanking.  But I digress...

Given this condition, we have an atmosphere created by the Japanese where the various islanders hated their Japanese occupiers.  So they did what they could, such as harbor and aide Australian and British coast watchers.  Call this, Henderson's early warning system.  Cactus almost always had over an hour's early warnings of "bogies heading yours".  They had a chance of getting up to altitude and setting up the best position to bounce the Japanese formations.

Also, considering the previous discussion of how the Japanese treated the natives, they never had such help.  And if they tried to set up an early warning system, it was almost always set up in hostile territory.  So the Japanese were almost always surprised when Mitchells suddenly showed up dropping parafrags overhead, etc.

This was one of many self-imposed disadvantages the Japanese set up for themself.

[MadTIGERmaN]

Agreed DCunning....
Im not even going to attempt spelling out his name,  well why not, Claire Chanault? anyway, he brought the Tigers  to China,  watched the chinese for some 3 years,  studing their areal tactics, then came up with his ideas on how to defeat them.  HAd nothing to do with what the Brits or Germans were doing.  


Me and a friend came up with a good tactic well flying CFS2 over the net against people.  Was a hi-lo game we played with the Tiger and Bearcat.  Id sit high in the Tiger,  hed go down in the dog fight.  Since the Bearcat can out turn just about anything,   alot of people would try to do a loop to get away from him,   in which case they would pull straight up into my 4 blazing machine guns and 4 blazing cannons.   If they were usen a Jap plane,  easy kills.

and if someone managed to sneak up to my altitude,  id simply use the Big Cats speed,  roll over, and dive, and let the unsuspecting chap follow me right down to where my wingman in the Bearcat would be waiting.

But we never really called each other wingman, as we never were very close to each other.


Id vote on US tactics simply on the "improving"  
how bout Pappy Boyingtons trick of flying bomber formations with the Corsairs to lure the Japs up into a fight......  

[james007]

Dcunning30 I'am surprise how much you know about the Pacific war. Not every one knows that much detail about that war. I think the Pacific war is one of the most interesting war in Modern history.

I"am not saying that its more intresting than the European Theater. To me they are both facinating.

One thing that I want to bring out is for all of us to keep in mind is that not every thing officialy written in history books is the obsolute truth.

That apllies even more to the Pacific war than the European since it was our personal war. This war was the most vicous and personal, racist war in American history.

We had necesaty to feel superial to this non European challenger at any cost.

In the End thru the many sacrificies and bravery of our men we where able to beat Imperial Japan.

By down playing our enemy ability in the Pacific we have only demean the effort and sacrificest of our men had to endure to acomplish VJ day.

James007

[dcunning30]

Agreed james007.

I have studied the Pacific War most of my life.  And I agree with the saying "history is written by the victors".  And I absolutely abhor historical revisionism.  That's why I seek out text from the Japanese perspective and text written by Japanes authors as much as possible.  I have read Samurai by Saburo Sakai, I have read God's Samurai, the biography of Mitsuo Fuchida.  BTW, that book is out of print, but you can buy it used off amazon.com.  I read the biography of Isoroku Yamamoto, The Rising Sun by John Toland, and several other books that approach the subject from the Japanese perspective.

I'm fully aware of the racist component.  But the fact of the matter is the Pacific War was a clash of cultures as much as it was of nations.  It was a clash of the oriental mindset vs. the occadental western mindset.  I'm not talking racism, I'm talking "what is".  And to illustrate my esteem of the matter, one of my heros happens to be Mitsuo Fuchida.  Now, we all know he was the air commander of the Pearl Harbor mission, but  as a tease, if you were to read God's Samurai, you'll understand why I esteem him so much.

Now, did the US conduct themselves well during the war?  We had out *issues*, for example, if we lost the war, Curtiss LeMay would definately be tried for crimes against humanity.  But then again, we won, therefore LeMay was a hero and became the first commander of SAC.

[dcunning30]

And another thing, Japan had absolutely no business going to war with the US.

[dcunning30]

And to give Japan their props, consider when Commodore Perry opened Japan for trade in 1854, Japan was pretty much a medevial, feudal society.

[james007]

Dccunning you brought up a great subject. Due to the hostility and brutality of the Axis power toward the inhabitans of the occupied contries.

They lost what ever little support they may have received from them.

Humanity always forget that you get more out of people with carrots than with a stick.

As for the best tatics it all depended in what area you meant. You have to take this subject in different levels.

If its Naval you have to give to credit where credit is due. Imperial Japan naval aviators early in the war were probably the best in training and skill in history.

As the war pregress we improved to a very high level of expertice.

Our tatics and leadership where the best in the World.

If you are talking about land tatical warfare. The Germans where the best in the World at the begning of the war. They where the first truely modern Airforce in the World as we understand it today.

We improve our tatical ability throughout the war and by the ending of the war our tatical techniques was even better than the Germans.

Our ability to cordinate ground attacks where nothing short of outstanding.

Long range Bombing is something

[james007]

Dcunning A love this subject. Since all this Simulators are base on World war two I think this post is very mush related to it. I will continie this dicscution at a later date.

I have to go to work now.

I hope to continues this facinating dicuscution.

You are all very informative.

Thank you James007