User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/17/2021 9:53:24 PM EDT
Interesting video. It's widely known that the Zero's performance shocked the US when it was first encountered, but something I didn't know is how inaccurate US field manuals and spotter guides were early in the war regarding other types, many of which didn't exist. Some of the aircraft listed seem to be the result of poorly translated (or no serious translation was attempted of) Japanese publications that were discussing foreign warplanes, or civilian planes, or just proposal sketches that never became hardware. Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, or intentional Japanese disinformation, or comic books. Some, dangerously, were even common US military aircraft that had no doppelgangers in Japanese service. Brings home how in the dark the US military was at the time.
 Japanese Blunder Weapons - The TAIU Bloopers of the Pacific War |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2021 11:03:10 PM EDT
[#1]
Tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2021 11:17:45 PM EDT
[#2]
Probably not much different than the Sherman crews who were told their tanks were the best in the world. Then ran into some battle tested German tanks with much better guns mounted on them. Shot holes right through the Shermans
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 12:30:44 AM EDT
[#3]
There was basically no way to get Intel out of Japan. We had military attaches but they hid their important stuff from them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 11:44:47 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There was basically no way to get Intel out of Japan. We had military attaches but they hid their important stuff from them. I recall reading what intel the US did get was mostly derived from the Chinese theater. Certainly the Flying Tigers air squadron supplied intel on the Zero's. Problem was too often the intel weenies had their minds made up & nothing was going to change that. MacArthur's G2, Willoughby (sp?) was notorious for rejecting anything MacA felt went against his feelz. That was evident when the Chinese entered the Korea War. US intel in the pre-WW2 era was solely lacking in competence. This continued into WW2, which is why Roosevelt invented the CIA with its Ivy League pedigree with Bill Donavan's crew. Some might argue that military intel's issues continue to this day as far as rejecting things which go against their pre-conceived beliefs. I'll leave that to others to decide. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 12:43:46 PM EDT
[#5]
US Intelligence has many things wrong with respect to Japan pre- and early-WW2. Their naval torpedo doctrine, and the capabilities of their torpedoes, was presented in a report pre-Pearl Harbor and ignored for a couple years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 12:57:58 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, I doubt there were few if any Zeros in China since that was primarily fought by the IJA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:01:58 PM EDT
[#7]
I enjoyed this recent analysis.
 The A6M Naval Carrier Fighter - Zero or Hero? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:24:12 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Quoted: Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, I'm going to go out on a limb here.. I doubt there were few if any Zeros in China since that was primarily fought by the IJA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:24:35 PM EDT
[#9]
Thanks.
Naval Intelligence did a better job with ships. While details of the Yamato class were vague, Naval Intelligence thought the guns were only 16". Didn't matter i the long run. We used aeroplanes to sink both of them (and torpedoes fired from the submarine Archerfish to sink the converted carrier from that class). |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:28:08 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm going to go out on a limb here.. I doubt there were few if any Zeros in China since that was primarily fought by the IJA. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, I'm going to go out on a limb here.. I doubt there were few if any Zeros in China since that was primarily fought by the IJA. The very first victories tallied by the Zero were over Chunking, China in July 1940. It is true the majority of Japanese fighters in China were Army Ki-43 Oscars and similar, but the Zero was operated over China long before Pearl Harbor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:33:29 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Interesting video. It's widely known that the Zero's performance shocked the US when it was first encountered, but something I didn't know is how inaccurate US field manuals and spotter guides were early in the war regarding other types, many of which didn't exist. Some of the aircraft listed seem to be the result of poorly translated (or no serious translation was attempted of) Japanese publications that were discussing foreign warplanes, or civilian planes, or just proposal sketches that never became hardware. Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, or intentional Japanese disinformation, or comic books. Some, dangerously, were even common US military aircraft that had no doppelgangers in Japanese service. Brings home how in the dark the US military was at the time.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZieEcRROV0For those interested in Pre WW2 intel on the Japanese, and how the U.S. did so poorly- Prelude to Pearl Harbor It was less a failure of those actually in theatre, and more a failure of those in the upper echelons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:35:36 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Probably not much different than the Sherman crews who were told their tanks were the best in the world. Then ran into some battle tested German tanks with much better guns mounted on them. Shot holes right through the Shermans In it's defense, for what it was tasked to do, there were none better. Hunnicutt's "Sherman" is worth a read, if you can borrow a copy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:44:03 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For those interested in Pre WW2 intel on the Japanese, and how the U.S. did so poorly- Prelude to Pearl Harbor It was less a failure of those actually in theatre, and more a failure of those in the upper echelons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 1:46:20 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just ordered a copy, thanks. Glad to help, I own a copy that obviously saw a lot of use (and sun) given how faded the dustjacket is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 2:02:13 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In it's defense, for what it was tasked to do, there were none better. Hunnicutt's "Sherman" is worth a read, if you can borrow a copy. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Probably not much different than the Sherman crews who were told their tanks were the best in the world. Then ran into some battle tested German tanks with much better guns mounted on them. Shot holes right through the Shermans In it's defense, for what it was tasked to do, there were none better. Hunnicutt's "Sherman" is worth a read, if you can borrow a copy. Indeed. When you can DRIVE to the fight, you can have a bigger tank with more armor and a bigger gun. When you have to pack them into Liberty Ships, and then dock at a pier with a crane big enough to unload them, to get them to the fight, nothing beats a Sherman in the time period. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 2:07:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Japan did operate small numbers of captured Brewster Buffalos, P-40, and B-17.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 2:11:59 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks. Naval Intelligence did a better job with ships. While details of the Yamato class were vague, Naval Intelligence thought the guns were only 16". Didn't matter i the long run. We used aeroplanes to sink both of them (and torpedoes fired from the submarine Archerfish to sink the converted carrier from that class). Not really. The Alaska class was a response, in part, to the Naval Intelligence belief that Japanese pocket battleships in the German style were under construction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 2:29:10 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Japan did operate small numbers of captured Brewster Buffalos, P-40, and B-17.  Kato Hayabusa Sento-tai (1944) w/ English Subtitles (complete) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2021 2:30:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Interesting video. It's widely known that the Zero's performance shocked the US when it was first encountered, but something I didn't know is how inaccurate US field manuals and spotter guides were early in the war regarding other types, many of which didn't exist. Some of the aircraft listed seem to be the result of poorly translated (or no serious translation was attempted of) Japanese publications that were discussing foreign warplanes, or civilian planes, or just proposal sketches that never became hardware. Some were the result of varying eyewitness accounts from the war in China, or intentional Japanese disinformation, or comic books. Some, dangerously, were even common US military aircraft that had no doppelgangers in Japanese service. Brings home how in the dark the US military was at the time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZieEcRROV0 |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
