Why did the Japanese never build any decent heavies?

[BossGnome]

The question says it all. The japs started facing B-17s in 1942... didn't they ever think of developping their own version of the plane? If so, why was the design scrapped? What was the Japanese "bomber philosophy" like? What was the IJA/IJN looking for in a bomber design? It seems to me most of their designs are heavily lacking in pretty much everything...

[Ron Saueracker]

Well, we eat big heavy potatoes and the Orientals like fluffy rice dishes?[:D]

[BLUESBOB]

Probably has to do with a problem they faced prior to, and during the war...lack of fuel.

[el cid again]

They bought the Condor - but too late to get the prototypes to Japan before hostilities prevented delivery.

They bought the DC-5E and tried to convert it to a bomber - but the bad design and their inexperience combined to result only in a heavy transport (see G5N1 in RHS).

They did build the G8 - and it is in RHS - so there you are.

There was also an army 4 engine plane - and also a joint army-navy "Japanese B-36" - but they were too late for the war. These were atom bomb deliverers FYI.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: BossGnome

The question says it all. The japs started facing B-17s in 1942... didn't they ever think of developping their own version of the plane? If so, why was the design scrapped? What was the Japanese "bomber philosophy" like? What was the IJA/IJN looking for in a bomber design? It seems to me most of their designs are heavily lacking in pretty much everything...

WHAT were they going to bomb? They could never get in land-based range of Los Angeles, let alone Detroit. Also, they sufferred from a materials shortage, which made a long-ranged twin engined bomber a much better economic proposition.

[BossGnome]

well, it seems from my own experience that bombing places like Tarawa with allied 4 engine bombers work really well. With no decent jap 4 engine bombers, counter bombing is very hard, nigh impossible. Also, what about bombing the Chinese cities? Or the indian ones?

[TulliusDetritus]

First of all we have to understand that "heavy bombers" = strategic bombing. The only country which truly assumed this military concept on WW2: the USA. Concept taken from the italian Dohuet, the father of the thing/creature.

Other countries just could not "predict" this new kind of war (to some extent, this is true for the USSR). Others just couldn't afford it: "materials shortage", "fuel", etc.: Japan.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

First of all we have to understand that "heavy bombers" = strategic bombing. The only country which truly assumed this military concept on WW2: the USA. Concept taken from the italian Dohuet, the father of the thing/creature.

Other countries just could not "predict" this new kind of war (to some extent, this is true for the USSR). Others just couldn't afford it: "materials shortage", "fuel", etc.: Japan.

Well, UK was very much into Strategic bombing too. Just that their bad experiences about daylight bombing in 40-41 made them prefer night attacks. Air Marshal Harris and his Bomber Command were very active in the war.

One funny (at least too my sense of humour) thing I did read about "Bomber" Harris (he had quite dark sense of humour too)was: He was driving at night with his car during 1943 and speeding. He was stopped by a young bobby who said "Sir, if you drive like that you could kill someone!" He answered "Son, I kill thousands every night..". Bit exaggerating, but basicly true.

[el cid again]

WHAT were they going to bomb? They could never get in land-based range of Los Angeles, let alone Detroit. Also, they sufferred from a materials shortage, which made a long-ranged twin engined bomber a much better economic proposition.

For widely available English discussion of this, see Rene Francillion's Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. The Japanese would not agree with the above. They felt range was paramount, and concluded after difinitive studies that to increase it, four engines were the solution (except for one case, where they went to six). What they wanted to bomb mainly was bases, before they were in range of enemy bombers. For an example of what they had in mind, consider the (long secret) raids on the B-29 airfields by the Ki-67s - amazing raids. Handfulls of bombers (by Allied standards) would (consistently) hit the massed, armed, fueled B-29s just before launch. [We did not understand until after the war how they knew what day that would be? They watched the weather planes, and we only sent them a fixed time before a raid!] They had to stage through Iwo - which is why we took the place - and they had to fly two days (nights actually) each way! But the raids were fantastically productive.

Another target considered was Boeing Renton - the biggest building in the World. For this, bases in Alaska were contemplated. [It is not well understood by people who look at Mercatur projections that the distances in the North are LESS, rather than MORE on a globe].

For atomic and other wmd (specifically including bw and cw weapons) the favorite targets were San Francisco and LA - and at one point New York City and Washington were in the loop (hence the range of the I-400 - able to make the round trip). We captured some 250 kg (551 pound) radiological bombs, and plans of a Japanese atom bomb were captured en route to a Soviet general in 1946. Since then, an academic has published a different copy. A Korea scholar also reports a Japanese "thorium bomb" - something just now beginning to make sense - with the discovery of an ALLIED "thorium bomb" - apparently tested in Australia (by UK - which seems not to have entirely trusted all its options to the US Manhattan Project). The problem is, this weapon turned out to be "too hot to handle" - and presumably the Japanese had the same problems. Nevertheless, the viability of some sort of atomic weapon was assurred enough that bombers to deliver it were designed, although the Japanese always believed atomic weapons were for "the next war." They got a lot farther with BW weapons - and had a variety of programs - including one to deliver baloon bombs from submarine aircraft carriers - and another to use high altitude winds trans Pacific (this being tested with incendiary bombs - to the tune of about 12,000 launched and over 3,000 falling as far East as Michigan - the tracked of these being Burt Webber, University of Oregon Press: Silent Seige - a horrible book which nevertheless has unique disclosures by Japanese in it). There were both army and navy CW programs, but Gen Sugiama (for IJA) and the Imperial General Staff (for IJN) ordered these destroyed in the summer of 1945 to PREVENT their use on invasion forces!

[Big B]

For all their plans, let us not forget that the only bobmbing of the mainland USA that Japan ever actually carried out was with ballons drifting in the jet stream.
It looks self evident that Japan lacked the capability to create and operate their own version of the "8th Air Force"...otherwise they simply would have done so.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

WHAT were they going to bomb? They could never get in land-based range of Los Angeles, let alone Detroit. Also, they sufferred from a materials shortage, which made a long-ranged twin engined bomber a much better economic proposition.

For widely available English discussion of this, see Rene Francillion's Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. The Japanese would not agree with the above. They felt range was paramount, and concluded after difinitive studies that to increase it, four engines were the solution (except for one case, where they went to six). What they wanted to bomb mainly was bases, before they were in range of enemy bombers. For an example of what they had in mind, consider the (long secret) raids on the B-29 airfields by the Ki-67s - amazing raids. Handfulls of bombers (by Allied standards) would (consistently) hit the massed, armed, fueled B-29s just before launch. [We did not understand until after the war how they knew what day that would be? They watched the weather planes, and we only sent them a fixed time before a raid!] They had to stage through Iwo - which is why we took the place - and they had to fly two days (nights actually) each way! But the raids were fantastically productive.

Another target considered was Boeing Renton - the biggest building in the World. For this, bases in Alaska were contemplated. [It is not well understood by people who look at Mercatur projections that the distances in the North are LESS, rather than MORE on a globe].

For atomic and other wmd (specifically including bw and cw weapons) the favorite targets were San Francisco and LA - and at one point New York City and Washington were in the loop (hence the range of the I-400 - able to make the round trip). We captured some 250 kg (551 pound) radiological bombs, and plans of a Japanese atom bomb were captured en route to a Soviet general in 1946. Since then, an academic has published a different copy. A Korea scholar also reports a Japanese "thorium bomb" - something just now beginning to make sense - with the discovery of an ALLIED "thorium bomb" - apparently tested in Australia (by UK - which seems not to have entirely trusted all its options to the US Manhattan Project). The problem is, this weapon turned out to be "too hot to handle" - and presumably the Japanese had the same problems. Nevertheless, the viability of some sort of atomic weapon was assurred enough that bombers to deliver it were designed, although the Japanese always believed atomic weapons were for "the next war." They got a lot farther with BW weapons - and had a variety of programs - including one to deliver baloon bombs from submarine aircraft carriers - and another to use high altitude winds trans Pacific (this being tested with incendiary bombs - to the tune of about 12,000 launched and over 3,000 falling as far East as Michigan - the tracked of these being Burt Webber, University of Oregon Press: Silent Seige - a horrible book which nevertheless has unique disclosures by Japanese in it). There were both army and navy CW programs, but Gen Sugiama (for IJA) and the Imperial General Staff (for IJN) ordered these destroyed in the summer of 1945 to PREVENT their use on invasion forces!

I have to agree more with these two:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

First of all we have to understand that "heavy bombers" = strategic bombing. The only country which truly assumed this military concept on WW2: the USA. Concept taken from the italian Dohuet, the father of the thing/creature.

Other countries just could not "predict" this new kind of war (to some extent, this is true for the USSR). Others just couldn't afford it: "materials shortage", "fuel", etc.: Japan.

Well, UK was very much into Strategic bombing too. Just that their bad experiences about daylight bombing in 40-41 made them prefer night attacks. Air Marshal Harris and his Bomber Command were very active in the war.

[el cid again]

First of all we have to understand that "heavy bombers" = strategic bombing. The only country which truly assumed this military concept on WW2: the USA. Concept taken from the italian Dohuet, the father of the thing/creature.

Other countries just could not "predict" this new kind of war (to some extent, this is true for the USSR). Others just couldn't afford it: "materials shortage", "fuel", etc.: Japan.

Partially correct, partially not. It is true the theory came from Dohuet. But he had advocates in all the great powers. And at least the Brits did make heavies (we never did have a plane that could lift what the Lancaster could during the war) and use them. There is a new book on German efforts (Luftwaffe Over Amerika) and it indicates the "just couldn't affort it" argument is also right.

But Japan did not consider a "heavy" bomber in the same sense we did. Their focus was either anti-naval (JNAF) or counter-air (JAAF). They did do bombing of cities in China, before what we considered to be the war (WWII rages for ten years, from 1935 to 1945, in Asia - and it was ALWAYS focused on China - from a Japanese point of view). These caused Japan to learn early things like "escort bombers or take unacceptable losses in daylight" and "bombers are not that effective against cities." [They are COUNTERPRODUCTIVE - they generate political support for the enemy!] Japan sought to achieve range at the expense of bomb load and, initially, armor (a choice, not ignorance - made by Adm Yamamoto as an air bureau chief). Later, they conceived of long range atomic bombers, but only designed them for one bomb, and nothing like US/UK bomb loads - again it was range that was the object. For Japan, the object was to take out major bases, particularly fleet bases - without ships we could not hope to invade places of interest. This was never anything like our concept of 'strategic bombing.'

[el cid again]

For all their plans, let us not forget that the only bobmbing of the mainland USA that Japan ever actually carried out was with ballons drifting in the jet stream.

Oops! You don't know about the Glen!

Seems one Warrant Officer name Fuchida (no relation to the captain) took off - twice - from a submarine off the coast of Oregon - armed with incendiaries instead of an observer - and tried to start forest fires! He came back and dreamed up the idea of I-400 - a submarine able to carry a true bomber in numbers! [His exec forwarded the idea to Yamamoto, who backed it, planning 18 of these ships - in a version never built. After his death, a larger version was built - it carried 3 bombers instead of 2 - and also some other subs were enlarged to carry 2 bombers instead of 1 Glen.] Anyway, the Glen is the ONLY Axis aircraft ever to bomb the Continental USA during WWII! Fujida offers a personal account in Silent Seige by Burt Webber. He also apologized decades later.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

For all their plans, let us not forget that the only bobmbing of the mainland USA that Japan ever actually carried out was with ballons drifting in the jet stream.

Oops! You don't know about the Glen!

Seems one Warrant Officer name Fuchida (no relation to the captain) took off - twice - from a submarine off the coast of Oregon - armed with incendiaries instead of an observer - and tried to start forest fires! He came back and dreamed up the idea of I-400 - a submarine able to carry a true bomber in numbers! [His exec forwarded the idea to Yamamoto, who backed it, planning 18 of these ships - in a version never built. After his death, a larger version was built - it carried 3 bombers instead of 2 - and also some other subs were enlarged to carry 2 bombers instead of 1 Glen.] Anyway, the Glen is the ONLY Axis aircraft ever to bomb the Continental USA during WWII! Fujida offers a personal account in Silent Seige by Burt Webber. He also apologized decades later.

[&o][:D] Sorry I missed that - I bow to the Strategic capabilities of the Glen![:D]

[el cid again]

It looks self evident that Japan lacked the capability to create and operate their own version of the "8th Air Force"...otherwise they simply would have done so.

It is a different country, with different concepts, and a different strategic situation. They never thought in terms of an 8th Air Force. The nearest thing was those baloon bombs you deride so much. What if I told you Imperial Japan was the first country ever to have overkill? [The ability to, theoretically - no country ever had it practically - including us with strategic nuclear weapons - wipe out the entire population of the world]
They had 16 times as much anthrax as it would take, if it could be delivered. This they combined with a whole new class of bombs to deliver the anthrax and fleas (to "vector" them) - and while they could be delivered by aircraft (and were in China) - they were mostly to be delivered by baloon bombs. The incendiaries were to proove the bombs would reach the USA and Canada. And they did. When August Storm began, Gen Ichii (Unit 731) called the COS of Kwangtung Army (his daughter is a witness) and they decided not to launch the attack (on the USA) because "it would not do any good." They were right - it might have caused us to attempt to exterminate all Japanese - but it would not have defeated us.

[Big B]

I would simply reply to you that Japan may have had plans for ANYTHING, but their ability to carry through and deliver said plans and inflict their will on the enemy was totally LACKING...otherwise Japan (in the life and death struggle she was in) would have carried through and delivered on her plans..


B

ORIGINAL: el cid again

It looks self evident that Japan lacked the capability to create and operate their own version of the "8th Air Force"...otherwise they simply would have done so.

It is a different country, with different concepts, and a different strategic situation. They never thought in terms of an 8th Air Force. The nearest thing was those baloon bombs you deride so much. What if I told you Imperial Japan was the first country ever to have overkill? [The ability to, theoretically - no country ever had it practically - including us with strategic nuclear weapons - wipe out the entire population of the world]
They had 16 times as much anthrax as it would take, if it could be delivered. This they combined with a whole new class of bombs to deliver the anthrax and fleas (to "vector" them) - and while they could be delivered by aircraft (and were in China) - they were mostly to be delivered by baloon bombs. The incendiaries were to proove the bombs would reach the USA and Canada. And they did. When August Storm began, Gen Ichii (Unit 731) called the COS of Kwangtung Army (his daughter is a witness) and they decided not to launch the attack (on the USA) because "it would not do any good." They were right - it might have caused us to attempt to exterminate all Japanese - but it would not have defeated us.

[Mike Scholl]

One other key point. Strategic Air warfare was the most expensive (in terms of cost per man involved) type of warfare any of the participants in the Second World War engaged in. Japan was a poor country with limited resources. They needed to get maximum return on their limited investment.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

One other key point. Strategic Air warfare was the most expensive (in terms of cost per man involved) type of warfare any of the participants in the Second World War engaged in. Japan was a poor country with limited resources. They needed to get maximum return on their limited investment.

Strategic bombing was extremely expensive in fuel.

[niceguy2005]

One would have to think that a little of it also comes from overall war strategy. Japan teneded to fight a military vs militray war on the US. Thus their paradigm was to beat us by decisevly beating our military. After all, we westerners were weak and undisciplined. Strategic bombing attacked civilians, which weren't really the prime target. Now, this is not to say that their wasn't discussion among Japanese leaders as to alternative strategies, but the basic paradigm was beat the US military, in particular the navy.

The US on the otherhand came from a paradigm of a nation vs nation war. They weren't going to win by a decisive battel, but by production and attrition. From this paradigm strategic war makes tremendous sense. Destroy the others ability to wage war upon you. That's not to say that the US didn't care about winning battles, but that wasn't the way that they were going to win the war. They were going to win the war even if they "lost" every battle along the way.

[MightyPaladin]

I've always heard that the USAAF lost more people than any other service during the war. Something like 40,000 airframes and 120,000 people. Can anyone confirm or deny? I have to go to school, don't have time to look around the 'net for a good source.

Anyway, if the above is true, then very few countries could have sustained stratigic bombing.




Seems to me that alot of people on these forums assume that a different strategy by one side would not be met by a countering strategy on the other side. I wonder what kind of west coast air defense there would have been if Japan had tried some sort of mass formation stratigic bombing?


Cheers



MightyPaladin

[mdiehl]

After all, we westerners were weak and undisciplined. Strategic bombing attacked civilians, which weren't really the prime target.

Well, they very clearly attacked "civilians" in China and in the PI. Including strategic bombing (twin engined) raids in Shanghai.