Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pacific War 1938 How Possible?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    I still have not had time to find what model fighter the IJN used previous to the A5M. The latter was just comming into operational status in small numbers in late 1937. It could out run the F2F by some thirty MpH and out climb it as well. Turn radius, roll rate, dive speed, et al are unknown to me for either. I am guessing the IJN pilots would have a lot less combat experience and less advantageous training in 1938 vs 1941.
    They'd probably have something like the Ki-10 in service as a frontline fighter.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_Ki-10

    Just taking a quick look at the specs, the Buffalo can outperform it by a noticeable margin in every category but service ceiling. That along with the Buff being tougher And having well over 4 times the firepower (4 x 50 cals compared to 2 x 30 cals)
    Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

    Comment


    • #17
      Still have not time to look up the IJN carrier planes. The A5M Claude is the only one I'm familiar with. It looks like the F3F & F3F biplanes would be the most common USN fighter of 1938. The F2A Buffalo did not become operational until 1939.

      Whatever the aircraft pilot training and tactics are going to count for more. The Japanese will have a year or less of combat experience & barely time to asorb the lessons & correct any peace time deficiencies. So, they are not going to have much of a edge as they did at the start of 1942.

      Comment


      • #18
        Would this Pacific War begin with the Japanese attempting a sneak attack to cripple the US fleet?

        Or are they meeting face to face at full strength?
        The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
          Would this Pacific War begin with the Japanese attempting a sneak attack to cripple the US fleet?

          Or are they meeting face to face at full strength?
          I'm not sure they'd have the capacity to launch a sufficiently damaging sneak attack. Most likely it'd be an attempt to draw the US fleet into a decisive battle within range of Japanese land-based aircraft. That was something that, iirc, they planned to do in order to counter War Plan Orange.
          Diadochi Rising Wargame:
          King Pairisades I of the Bosporan Kingdom

          Comment


          • #20
            And there wouldn't be a Taranto to copy.
            The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
              And there wouldn't be a Taranto to copy.
              But there would be Kronstadt - doing it with MTBs in 1919.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
                Would this Pacific War begin with the Japanese attempting a sneak attack to cripple the US fleet?

                Or are they meeting face to face at full strength?
                Originally posted by Anacreon View Post
                I'm not sure they'd have the capacity to launch a sufficiently damaging sneak attack. Most likely it'd be an attempt to draw the US fleet into a decisive battle within range of Japanese land-based aircraft. That was something that, iirc, they planned to do in order to counter War Plan Orange.
                Depends on what one considers a "sneak attack". The Japanese Navy did open the Russo Japanese war with the suprise attack on Port Aurthur. That remained one of their prize actions, much refered to in their naval schools. Suprise remained a important part of IJN doctrine, as it did in other nations naval doctrines.

                Related to this was the doctrinal role of the aircraft carrier in the 1930s. As a auxillary weapon its purpose was to support the main battle fleet with scouts and raids or ancilliary attacks to attrit the enemy before the main battle was joined by the battleships. In the that sense the carrier functioned as a sort of heavy cruiser, providing scout planes & high speed distant striking power (via its bomber squadrons). The IJN intended to use its submarines the same way, as scouts and a attritional force to wear down the enemy fleet before the main battle. As with the submarines suprise on the part of the torpedo and bomber squadrons would be important. In this role the aircraft carriers would supplement the land based air attacking the enemy fleet.

                So yes the IJN would attempt 'sneak attacks', tho not of the scope of the Oahu raid of 1941. The US Asiatic squadron in China would be the most likely target. Depending on the date that varied from only the gun boats and maybe a destroyer squadron, to a larger fleet of light and heavy cruisers and more destroyers. The US naval base in the Phillipines would be a possible target for a IJN carrier raid of 1938. More difficult than the squadrons on station in China. Raids on US island possesions in the Central Pacific would be unproductive since the US had only a few tiny detachments scattered about. Mostly communications units manning radio stations.

                Any USN squadrons or fleets located at sea might also be IJN suprise targets. These would be the most difficult due to problems locating the USN ships and correctly positioning the intercept force in secrecy. Submarine intercept would be the most likely, tho a high value target like a heavy cruiser and some destroyers headed to the Phillipines, or departing China might justify the effort by a carrier & escorts.
                Last edited by Carl Schwamberg; 10 Dec 11, 14:11.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Aber View Post
                  But there would be Kronstadt - doing it with MTBs in 1919.
                  Yes, that could work. The Japanese could study the action and make the necessary changes--because suprise attacking US warships in 1938 would not be as easy as doing to the Russians in 1919.

                  Speculation, of course. I'm fond of motor torpedo boats punching well above their weight, but if they're caught by USN aircraft before hand they're done for.
                  The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                  Comment

                  Latest Topics

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X