Japanese Kamikazees

[Sharkfreak06]

I think Paradox needs to do something to put the factor of kamikazees in HOI 2. I know threads like this have been posted before, and everyone came to the conclusion they weren't deadly enough to play a factor... but I don't think that's true at all.

The best way to implement them would be to make them available for construction by a Japanese player after Japan falls to a certain VP range, meaning he is clearly losing. They can be built like V1 and V2 rockets are right now, and require 1 manpower. Then they can be deployed at airbases and move like planes can, and they can attack once and cause bigtime org loss if they hit... just a suggestion.

 

[Lord of Pain]

1) Manchester Guardian (19th April, 1945)

"...with 16-year-old pilots..."

How can they even check that? I mean... the planes flew into a ship and exploded... And if they missed the ship, they flew into the water, swam towards the ship and pulled a granade. :wacko:

 

[unmerged(19841)]

Did the Manchester Guardian's field correspondant point at a tiny sliver of charred flesh, stuck to the side of the ship's conning tower, and shout "Look! This one was only sixteen years old!"?

Not only are you the HOI 2,god of information,but youralso dam funny too...

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Wouldn't be the last time the Guardian pulled the facts out of its arse would it?

 

[unmerged(55060)]

I have to wonder how a newspaper thousands of miles away in an enemy country knew the age of the Kamikaze pilot... you don't really get much of a chance to interview the guy before or during the Suicide-dive, and afterwards... there isn't a lot left to examine. Or interview.

Not to put too fine a point on it... a crash-dive at hundreds of miles per hour by a plane loaded with bombs and gasoline will convert the pilot into a few charred scraps of hamburger.

Did the Manchester Guardian's field correspondant point at a tiny sliver of charred flesh, stuck to the side of the ship's conning tower, and shout "Look! This one was only sixteen years old!"?

Funny... so my sources (i provided two) were inaccurate. your source, biased as he may be, is 100% factually accurate.

I understand bias, and the errors in reporting from 1000s of miles away... but you misrepresent the truth and accuse others of doing the same. You imply that K pilots were highly trained individuals... couldn't possibly be kids... but that isnt true...

"Hiromi Kawasaki, now 77, was a navy pilot trainee when he saw a recruitment poster for a top-secret project pinned to the noticeboard at his base. The stand-out attraction for the 18-year-old was that volunteers would have the chance to go to the front after only two or three months of training. "

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/Weekend/FK20Jp04.html

 

[blue emu]

"Hiromi Kawasaki, now 77, was a navy pilot trainee when he saw a recruitment poster for a top-secret project pinned to the noticeboard at his base. The stand-out attraction for the 18-year-old was that volunteers would have the chance to go to the front after only two or three months of training. "

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/Weekend/FK20Jp04.html

Even nowadays, in the USA, 18-year-olds are considered old enough for combat duty... they are not normally described as "children".

There is a big difference between an 18-year-old who is already enrolled in a Naval flight training program, and who will receive two or three more months of training... and the above-mentioned "16-year-old ... as young as children ... received very little training ... weren't even instructed how to land ... given 2 training missions that lasted about an hour each ... "

THAT was what I was objecting to... re-read my posts.

 

[unmerged(55060)]

I know what you were objecting to. I've found no legitimate evidence saying there were "children" flying kamikaze planes (Please note that I didnt say that in the first place). What I did find is that some kamikazees were less skilled japanese pilots flying less advanced aircraft and even substandard planes in some cases.

This is in contrast to your comments that:
"This is nonsense. All Kamikaze pilots were graduates of Flight Schools. Many of them were graduates of the Naval Academy. If they were children, they must have had IQs of 250 to get through all those tough courses before their teens."

and

"The Japanese could not afford to waste planes and pilots... they needed to expend each one profitably."

 

[blue emu]

You said:

... In fact, however, the majority of kamikaze pilots were young noncommissioned or petty officers, that is graduates of Navy and Army junior flight training schools...

I said:

All Kamikaze pilots were graduates of Flight Schools. Many of them were graduates of the Naval Academy...

Do you have evidence that some Kamikaze pilots had not even been taught to fly... ie: were not graduates of Flight Schools?

If not... why are we arguing? It sounds to me like we are saying the same thing, just in different words.

Regarding my allegedly "biased" source-book by Inoguchi and Nakajima... it is copyrighted (1958) by the United States Naval Institute in Annapolis, Maryland... not by the Imperial Japanese Navy... and has a forward by Vice-Admiral Brown; presumably the same Vice-Admiral Brown who commanded the Yorktown-Lexington Task Force in the Coral Sea battle.

Biased? Possibly... but you'll have to offer better evidence than just the fact that it was written by two Japanese airmen.

 

[Bullfrog]

This is nonsense. All Kamikaze pilots were graduates of Flight Schools. Many of them were graduates of the Naval Academy. If they were children, they must have had IQs of 250 to get through all those tough courses before their teens.

Yes they all received flight training.

Also nonsense. A great number of Kamikaze sorties turned back and returned to base, either because they couldn't find a worthwhile target, or because of weather. What were they supposed to do then, if they "weren't even instructed how to land"? Crash into the Control Tower? The Japanese could not afford to waste planes and pilots... they needed to expend each one profitably.

True at first, like in the Phillipines where Kamikaze began, but later in Okinawa...

Also from the Wikipedia:

Early successes, such as the sinking of the St. Lo were followed by an immediate expansion of the program, and over the next few months over 2,000 planes made such attacks.

Purpose-built kamikaze planes, as opposed to converted fighters and dive-bombers, had no landing gear at all. A specially-designed propellor plane, the Nakajima Ki-115 Tsurugi, was a simple, easy-to-build plane, intended to use up existing stocks of engines, in a wooden airframe. The undercarriage was non-retractable: it was jettisoned shortly after take-off for a suicide mission, and then re-used on other planes.

 

[unmerged(55060)]

Biased? Possibly... but you'll have to offer better evidence than just the fact that it was written by two Japanese airmen.

Actually that is the evidence needed to show it is baised. I have a book called Panzer General by Guderian. Do I think it is a good book??? yep. Do I think he told the truth according to him??? most likely. Do i think it is biased??? definitely.

So... do i think these two japansese pilots who were involved with the program were biased to portray it in a certain light... possibly hiding some things and embellishing others??? yes. They also probably did not know the intimate details of each of the 1000s of attacks either. Regardless, I do think it is probably accurate in most things and i am not disputing your source. I just think it was misused to try to show that all or most kamikaze pilots were highly trained.

Highly trained pilots were surely used for missions in which they had a chance of coming home. Lesser trained pilots were sent out without the return ticket. Dont you think?

This debate is tired either way.

Peace

 

[binTravkin]

Just one note about misconceptions and other logical errors during your debate:
Ending an Imperial Flight School doesn't really equal to 'having recieved flight training'.

And please use factual material found online and on approved sources, like for example Wikipedia, not memoirs (as they're almost never unbiased) and even less newspapers (which tend to make something out of nothing and often interpret facts subjectively).

 

[Lord Finnish]

Kamikazee attacks were an act of desperation. If you're at a point you need to use them, you should just begin a new game.

The kamikaze strikes were not desperate, the flyers were totally volunteered and they served their emperor and religion, and Japan, of course

 

[unmerged(60756)]

I don´t think this statement was dedicated to the pilots, but to the leaders who gave the orders.

 

[Bullfrog]

The kamikaze strikes were not desperate, the flyers were totally volunteered and they served their emperor and religion, and Japan, of course

Kamikaze was initiated by zealous officers, and early on was not a desperate act. The Imperial government was highly disdainful of suicide attacks, where the men in battle viewed their sacrifice as honorable and patriotic. Later in the war almost all military actions sanctioned by the government involved some sort of suicide, whether of men or equipment. By the end the Japanese were entirely desperate and the pursuit of staving off defeat was evident in the choice to make a kamikaze unit.

 

[unmerged(14249)]

From the numbers quoted above, there were more kamikaze than German Tiger tanks (1350). Shall we get rid of Tiger tanks too because they were produced in such small numbers? And get rid of the Me-262 because that was produced in small numbers too ( just 1400). And get rid of naval bombers too because, even though there were tens of thousands of them, they are too good? By the time you killjoys are finished, we'll just be left with M4s, T-34s and generic infantry. But if you want a boring game like that, you can already go play World at War. But that army-level game has kamikaze, I see.

Me, I'd like to see not only kamikaze but also banzai attacks as a combat event. And if other nations want to make suicide attacks too, maybe they can have that as a doctrine choice. As it was, flying in Bomber Command or serving in a U-boat was quite suicidal. Your chances of surviving a tour of duty were small.

Andrew

 

[Acheron]

The Tiger tanks and Me 262 were produced in small numbrs because Germany was loosing the war and badly so. However, had the Japanese won the war, they surely wouldn't have used Kamikaze tactics.

I disgaree with brining in Kamikaze as a unit, but what about a new doctrine? It would increase casualties heavily, but make the attack more potent.

 

[unmerged(51521)]

Sorry to ask but isnt this coming very close to a prohibited topic? Suicide bombing isnt allowed in this forum and the kamikaze were commiting suicide attacks. You may not view this the same but it is technically against the rules.

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Sorry to ask but isnt this coming very close to a prohibited topic? Suicide bombing isnt allowed in this forum and the kamikaze were commiting suicide attacks. You may not view this the same but it is technically against the rules.

Pff. I think that rule's aimed more at trying to avoid I*rael based tendentiousness.

I fail to see the moral chasm between kamikaze tactics and the rest of WW2, frankly, short of a hypothetical PoofWars game without swazis, explosions or deaths this sort of thing can't be avoided and we shouldn't have to.

 

[unmerged(51521)]

Pff. I think that rule's aimed more at trying to avoid I*rael based tendentiousness.

I fail to see the moral chasm between kamikaze tactics and the rest of WW2, frankly, short of a hypothetical PoofWars game without swazis, explosions or deaths this sort of thing can't be avoided and we shouldn't have to.

I know, just a mod might not feel that way so I just thought I should mention it.

 

[Ceeker]

The only way that I think would be an effective or acceptable way to implement them would be in the form of an event to the Japanese player is if they are at war and their VP level is below a certain amount at 1944...and the Japanese player then gets to choose whether or not they would like to implement kamikaze attacks. The effect could be a manpower penalty and a small boost in attack rating to their naval bombers.

 

[unmerged(54933)]

an event is a good idea, but:
1. in Hoi2 the Naval attack from the bombers choose one ship after another and that is not good. It is true that all planes were aiming mainly for capital sips (CVs, CVEs, CVLs, BB, CA, CL...) but they were hitted randomly. so damage of each round of combat could hit random ship in the task force.
2. normal Tac or Navs will not be able to perfotm Kamikaze attacks.
3. It should work like Rockets. You train(build a unit) and send it to one way mission. They may be stopped by Fighter cover from land.
4. Kamikaze units will have lovered AA defence to simulate their loses due to CAPs, flaks and tryouts to hit ships.