List of ships sunk by Jap level bombers?

[Yaab]

Other than the attacks on Repulse and PoW, what did Jap level bombers accomplish against the Allied navies? I am asking about attacks carried out with bombs, not torpedoes.

Seems to me if you want to attack shipping with level bombers and go for a higher altitude, you should be aiming to carpet an area with smaller bombs. So instead of 3 x 250kg GP bombs, you should go for something like this 1 x 250kg, 10 x 50 kg, especially against "soft-skinned" ships (anything other than CA/CL, BB and CV).

[geofflambert]

Here's a list of warring parties that didn't keep very useful records: the CSA, the Trojans, the Carthaginians and the Japanese. Did I leave anyone out?
Here's a list of those that kept meticulous records, beginning with the most anal retentive: The Germans, the British and the good ol' USA.

Not to say the info you want could not be found in Allied records.

[Buckrock]

Anti-shipping strikes were actually uncommon, most Japanese level bomber missions being against land targets. When naval and
merchant vessels were to be the targets, the torpedo was the preferred weapon when available for G3M/G4Ms.

The sinkings via level bombing I know of are the USS Langley and the USS Calhoun. Both reportedly involved the use of mixed
bombloads of 250kg and 60kg bombs. There was also an Allied transport sunk off Port Moresby by an attack from high altitude.

These attacks all occurred in 1942.

[BBfanboy]

During the initial landings at Guadalcanal, a transport (George F. Elliot IIRC) was hit by bombs and set on fire. During the night, light from these fires silhouetted the Allied Cruiser force for the Japanese during the Battle of Savo Sound. The transport eventually sank.
I think Betties were using bombs because they could not carry a torpedo that far.

[warspite1]

I think giving credit to the level bombers for Force Z seems wrong in any case. It was the torpedoes that did the critical damage not the bombs.

[TulliusDetritus]

Look no further than the 9 april 1942:

CVL Hermes hit by 40 250 kg bombs! [X(]

And the Cornwall and Dorsetshire sinkings too. Almost all the bombs of Egusa's men hit the two cruisers.

[MuguNiner]

USS Arizona, 12/7/41

[spence]

The sinkngs of the HMS Cornwall and HMS Dorsetshire were carried out by D3A carrier dive bombers. Not sure about HMS Hermes but the bombing was certainly carried out by carrier aircraft (combo of dive bombers and level bombers?).

USS Arizona was hit in the magazine by an 800 kg converted AP shell which resulted in the famous explosion and destruction of the ship. That one spectacular success was one out of 50 such bombs dropped and has since concealed the fact that the majority of the 800 kg AP shell/bombs that actually hit (6/10) were the functional equivalent of duds.

High altitude precision bombing by anyone in WW2 was pretty much a joke.

[Yaab]

Thanks. So it seems, in the game, the availability of torpedoes, turns the Jap level bombers into moderately successful attack platform compared to the real life. Without their torpedoes, the level bombers were a non-factor in the naval war.

[spence]

The 3 squadrons of Nells/Bettys that sank the PoW/Repulse spent at least the month prior to that action undergoing specific and intense training for that very mission.

The attached website includes a post-war interview with IJN staff that includes a description of that training and some interesting info about subsequent operations by the units participating.

http://www.forcez-survivors.org.uk/

[wdolson]

On Feb 4, 1942 the USS Houston was attacked by a large force of bomb carrying Bettys and Nells. They put the #3 turret out of action, but that's about all they managed to do.

A number of ships were damaged by torpedoes from land based air including the second Houston off Formosa and the Intrepid.

If you want to geek out on damage reports, the USN reports on just about every warship damaged or sunk is online. A couple of sources:
https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/w/war-damage-reports.html
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/WDR/

I also have a book which chronicles the sinking of every Allied warship during the war. Most of the entries are fairly short, but they all list the cause (if known).

Bill

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

On Feb 4, 1942 the USS Houston was attacked by a large force of bomb carrying Bettys and Nells. They put the #3 turret out of action, but that's about all they managed to do.

According to Hornfischer's "Ship of Ghosts", only desperate DC efforts and a measure of luck stopped that hit taking out the whole ship
with a catastrophic aft magazine explosion. All 8" turrets (including No 3) had been loaded in preparation for repelling any low level torpedo
attacks and the hoists were packed with powder bags. Bomb fragments ignited a fire that wiped out the turret crew and threatened
the magazine.

During the same action, USS Marblehead suffered 2 bomb hits and a very near miss that partially lifted her out of the water, the resulting
damage leaving her with only limited steering and a lengthy battle to keep her flooding under control.

To achieve these hits, the Japanese committed 60 IJNAF level bombers against the 2 USN and 2 HNLMS cruisers, most aircraft carrying a pair
of 250kg bombs which were dropped over two passes (or more if "dummy runs" are included).

Though no Allied ships were sunk, several authors have claimed the results of this action had a considerable influence on the rest of the Java
Sea Campaign.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Thanks. So it seems, in the game, the availability of torpedoes, turns the Jap level bombers into moderately successful attack platform compared to the real life. Without their torpedoes, the level bombers were a non-factor in the naval war.

As the Allies discovered medium bombers needed a high level of coordination to successfully pull of low level shipping attacks. By mid war, this involved both heavily armed attack bombers and fighters suppressing flak combined with low level glide bombing and skip bombing attacks. It was very dangerous work and required durable aircraft.

The Japanese were deficient in almost all of these categories. They really had no suppression platforms such as Allied attack bombers or durable fighter bombers like the Beaufighter. In addition their medium bombers proved to be woefully vulnerable to Allied flak. I don't think they really perfected any sort of skip bombing tactics-probably for the reasons above.

Torpedoes could at least be dropped from a range that gave a "chance" for escape. But then, again after 1943 not too many Japanese planes of any type were getting home. Even as early as the Guadalcanal campaign Japanese bombers attacking land targets were being forced to bomb from very high altitude due to their vulnerability to flak. If you exclude those ships sitting at anchor or a dock, I suspect that Japanese level bombers did not sink too many.

[Yaab]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Makassar_Strait

So that would be the yardstick of the effectiveness of Jap's level bomber anti-shipping action? 60 bombers, 120 bombs, 3 hits and 1 damaging near miss, which is roughly 3% hit accuracy.

[m10bob]

While she did not sink, my dad in law was aboard the USS Wakefield at Singapore when a bomb hit the deck from a Betty.

http://ww2troopships.com/ships/w/wakefield/default.htm

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Makassar_Strait

So that would be the yardstick of the effectiveness of Jap's level bomber anti-shipping action? 60 bombers, 120 bombs, 3 hits and 1 damaging near miss, which is roughly 3% hit accuracy.

Hey, they had maneuvering targets to try and hit. At one point in the ETO a review of HB effectiveness concluded that few bombs got within five miles of the target - and their target was not moving. Something about flak and fighters causing premature completion ...

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: Yaab
So that would be the yardstick of the effectiveness of Jap's level bomber anti-shipping action? 60 bombers, 120 bombs, 3 hits and 1 damaging near miss, which is roughly 3% hit accuracy.

I doubt an accurate baseline for horizontal bombing accuracy vs an underway TF could be determined from just one action, even if it was (IIRC) the
largest of that type made by the Japanese during the Pacific War.

Shift the action to Aug 7th, 1942 and a horizontal bombing attack by 26 G4Ms at a similar altitude but against a much more numerous Allied TF missed
everything with their 156 bombs (250kg and 60kg).

Obviously your baseline would have given you at least one hit under those circumstances, so you need to work out what determined the different results.

[Yaab]

Thanks. Are you aware of a complete list of Jap level bomber attacks against ships?

[Buckrock]

No but that's not to say someone hasn't compiled one somewhere.

My knowledge of this type of Japanese attack only comes from reading of them while studying various Pacific campaigns. They were rare enough to get my attention during a study.

Those campaigns that mention them were the Philippines campaign (primarily the Dec '41 attacks on shipping in Manila Bay), the Java Sea Campaign, the separate attacks on Lexington and Enterprise during the USN Raids of Feb '42, the Battle of Coral Sea (attack on TF 44), a few 1942 Japanese raids on shipping off Port Moresby (and also some in 1943 during the Allied New Guinea amphibious offensive) and finally, the attacks on TFs and shipping off Guadalcanal Aug-Nov '42 (IIRC, there were only 3 such horizontal attacks including the one I mentioned earlier).

And of course the horizontal bombing component of the attack on Repulse and Prince of Wales.

[pelthunter]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Here's a list of those that kept meticulous records, beginning with the most anal retentive: The Germans, the British and the good ol' USA.

Hm. Apparently US record keeping depends in the issue.

For example, the Bari debacle was notoriously censored.