P-40 MTO operations

RE: MTO bombers (&bridges)

Apologies, Moggy (to both of you).

It seems I need to read the book again.

Regards,

kev35

RE: MTO bombers

Hi Kev,
Mosquitoes in the Med? Yes, they were there, 23 Sqd. (for one) flew their night fighters out of Luqa, there were othersqds. & PRU units, too. There were also Mossies in the Far East, too. There were problems with the glue joints in the main spa, several crashed because of wing failure. This was trace to the Canadian built Mosquitoes. The DHC, for some reason, used a different type of glue to the British built Mossie. The other mistake DHC made, they left small gaps in the glue joint, which allowed fungus to get in & compromise the glue. You’ll notice on later built Mosquitoes, they have 2 strips on top & below the wings, these are removeable so the spas can be checked for any problems, such as deterioration of glue joints.

Cheers,
Neilly

ps. I really must copy out that letter, for you, that was in the last edition of Flying Scale Models. I think you’ll find it interesting- problem time!!!:9

RE: MTO bombers

>Moggy,

>BTW, don’t go flying under any bridges. (Or not doing it and
>saying you had.)
>
>Neilly,

Excuse me!

The ‘other’ Moggy was the only one to actually fly under the bridge AND live.

Humph!

Moggy

RE: MTO bombers

Moggy,

Come on, not JUST a humble MT Corporal. Remember, “They also served…”

BTW, don’t go flying under any bridges. (Or not doing it and saying you had.)

Neilly,
regarding the Mosquito, were any used in the Mediterranean? If not, was heat a limiting factor in their deployment as it was in the Far East. Manoueverability and versatility are all well and good as long as the glue holds…

PII,

the book I mentioned is the War Diaries of Neville Duke (edited by Norman Franks). He flew Tomahawk IIB’s and Kittyhawk I’s with 112 Squadron from 12 nov 41 to 20 Apr 42.

With the Tomahawk he made the following claims, 2 Me 109F’s, 1 CR42, 1 Fiat G50 and 1 Macchi 200 destroyed, and 2 Ju87’s and a Ju52 probably destroyed as well as a 109F damaged. In the Kittyhawk he destroyed 2 Macchi 200’s. His final total was 26 and 3 shared destroyed, 3 probables and 6 damaged. All but those in the Tomahawk and Kittyhawk were made flying various marks of Spitfire.

Not a bad record either.

Regards,

kev35

RE: MTO bombers

>105 & 109 Sqds. are the 2 RAF Sqds. that are my prime
>interest, together with 8 Group PFF.
>
>Neilly

Ah!

My Father was in the RAF during WW2, as a humble MT Corporal though they did offer him some extra money if he’d sit in a turret but apparently he thought to himself “My fourth and finest son has yet to be conceived. It is undoubtedly better for the future of mankind if I do not die before young Moggy is created” (Or something like that)

However he spent the end of 1944 and the start of 1945 at Little Staughton. If I am not mistaken, this was the home of 109 Squadron?

Unfortunately all his wartime pictures (which I have inherited) are of his time fighting the Hun in Canada.

Moggy

RE: MTO bombers

Hi Kev,
Certainly have, 2 good books. The other one to read is, Clean Sweep by Tony Spooner. This books about Sir Ivor Broom, but has a lot about the Malta operations. Sir Ivor did some hauir-raising sorties out of there! Good book, interesting man!
105 & 109 Sqds. are the 2 RAF Sqds. that are my prime interest, together with 8 Group PFF.

TTFN,
Neilly

RE: MTO bombers

Neilly,

you’re right, I can’t imagine what it would have been like operating in circumstances where the losses were so grievous, especially as they had also operated under 2 group command from Norfolk on shipping strikes in the North Sea and off the Dutch coast.

I presume you have read Battle Axe Blenheims and Mosquito Thunder. Two absolutely excellent books.

Regards,

kev35

RE: MTO bombers

I think the bomber that did the most work flying out of Malta, was the Blenhiem, especially in the early years of the War. The casualty rate was horrendous! They attacked everything from shipping convoys to troop & motorised transport in North Africa. Their loss rate was amongst the worst in any of battle areas of the War. 105 & 107 Sqds. suffered really badly.

Cheers,
Neilly

MTO bombers

The RAF also used bombers both from Malta and in North Africa. I believe the Wellington was the mainstay of the force with units also operating the Baltimore, the Maryland, the Fairey Battle and the Bristol Blenheim. I think the Wellesley may have been used as well. Beauforts also operated from Malta on anti shipping strikes, as did Beaufighters. At one point I think Fleet Air Arm Albacores were also used in airfield bombing raids along the North African coast.

Can anyone tell me anything more about the siege at an airfield in Iraq (Habbaniya?) I have read a novel based on the actual event but would be interested in finding out more.

Regards

kev

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

Great stuff kev. What you’ve posted and what I’ve posted just highlights the fact that the MTO (specifically North Africa) is often one of the forgotten theaters or WWII. It seems like WWII took place only in Northern Europe and and the Western Pacific near Japan. I hope all of you here realize just how important an fierce the battles of the MTO were. If you look at it, the MTO had some very fascinating warplanes taking part. You have the Luftwaffe’s array of He-111, and Ju-88 medium bombers, Ju-87 light bombers, Bf-109, Bf-110, and Fw-190 fighters as well as Italian G.50, MC.200, MC.202 fighters. British Hurricane, Spitfire, Beaufighter, and Gladiator fighters, as well as American P-40 fighters. All these fascinating aircraft types along with all the brave units, most of which seemed very very good at what they did. Yet this theater is still forgotten. It is sad how history remembers, or forgets in this case, certain aspects of great events such as WWII.

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

PII,

Just when you thought it was all over…

First of all, thanks for the extra info on Pearl Harbor. Just to show the flip side of the coin, I’ve found some info on the MTO in The JG26 War Diary, volume one, by Donald Caldwell.

In early 1941, 7 Staffel of JG26 was seconded to the Mditerranean with 12 aircraft and began operations against Malta from Sicily. They enjoyed considerable success mainly against Hurricanes. They also spent a short time in Yugoslavia before moving on to North Africa. They were there from mid June until September. It was here they came up against Tomahawks, engaging in combat and I quote:

“29th July. Ten Ju 87s attacked a Tobruk convoy, and were in turn hit by eight Tomahawks of No. 2 Sqd. SAAF. The South Africans shot down four Ju 87’s before 7th Staffel Bf 109s could reach them. Two Tomahawks were then shot down; one pilot was killed, and the other survived as a POW. Three more Tomahawks returned to base with severe damage. Staffel pilots reported five victories.”

Two further claims were made against Tomahawks but on both occasions the aircraft lost were in fact Hurricanes.

The aircraft used by 7 Staffel, twelve Bf 109E’s were suffering badly in the conditions and the pilots and ground crews returned to Salonika in Northern Greece on the 24th of September. I quote again:

“On this date a Ju 52 carrying Staffel personnel was attacked over the Mediterranean by three Bristol Beaufighters. Two men were injured by cannon fire. The transport returned safely to Africa, but both men died there of their wounds. The 7th Staffels first casualties in the Mediterranean theater were thus suffered at the very end of their detached service. Ironically, the Staffels only fatalities were these two groundcrewmen. The pilots had come through the six months operations without loss.
The 7th Staffels record while in the Mediterranean theater was unique in the air war. Munchberg’s dozen fighters altered the course of an air campaign, and forced their enemies to to modify their strategy for an entire theater of operations. The unit shot down at least fifty-two enemy aircraft without losing a single pilot.”

It should be noted that most of the victories were against Hurricanes. I think you will agree that this is one hell of a record. Against such opposition it shows that the air war in the MTO was vicious and drawn out with both sides having little opportunity to reinforce due to combat commitments in other theatres. Pilots of both sides must have displayed incredible tenacity in this long drawn out battle of offensive and counter offensive fought in appalling conditions where the desert proved to be their enemy as well.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 02-04-02 AT 12:06 PM (GMT)]Nice going guys…although I haven’t contributed to this thread, I have enjoyed reading the various posts and have learnt some interesting snippets about the P-40 and the men who flew them…:)

~Wincing at the thought of what Mrs Snoopy might do with Snoopy’s laptop~ 😉

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

>No one is interested? I finally get the stories up and you
>guys abandon me. 🙂

Hey, PhantomII, give us a break, it was a long weekend! (And you should hear what Mrs Snoopy threatens to do with my laptop if I take it with me on a family weekend trip!!)

First off, thanks for the stories and the link. As Neilly says, a sentiment I fully endorse, most of us come here to learn more about a subject we all enjoy; and this thread has certainly helped us, both to learn and to enjoy. I think many of us have stories tucked away, about a little-known aircraft, theatre or personality; and it’s great when material like that comes out. It’s for these occasional gems that some of us come to this Forum.

And asking questions about little-known successes isn’t by any means to doubt them — the answers will only give more of us ammunition to back up the stories!

Anyway, thanks again for starting this thread — I’ve certainly learned something, and enjoyed the process. Hope you enjoyed the link I posted, too! Regards,

Snoopy

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

Well said. I was perhaps a bit harsh. I just want to get my point through about the P-40 not getting the credit it is due (and that its pilots are due). I only asked if you wanted the e-mail to prove that I’m serious about doing whatever possible to convince you or others about the validity of these claims as well as many others I’m sure P-40 groups had but aren’t always recognized as important. Regarding the P-40 at Pearl Harbor, I can tell you some about that. As I’m sure you know, most of the aircraft on the ground were destroyed, but two rather lucky pilots happened to have their planes parked at a nearby axiliary airfield that the Japanese didn’t pursue as a target. Kenneth Taylor and George “Wheaties” Welch witnessed the first few minutes of the attack. They promptly phoned the airfield their two P-40B’s were parked, and they told the ground crews to arm and fuel their aircraft as quickly as possible. They hopped into a Jeep and drove over to the airfield as quickly as possible. An Aichi D3A “Val” dive-bomber actually strafed them on the way, but they were unharmed. They made it to the airfield where they found their two Tomahawks waiting. They took off and immediately were under attack by more Japanese warplanes. They ended up shooting down seven Japanese planes, 3 for Taylor and 4 for Welch I believe though I might have it backwards. When they ran out of ammo (the whole time they had no ammo for the two .50’s in the nose, there was only ammo for the two .30’s in each wing at that airfield), they landed and rearmed, but by the time they got back up in the air, the last Japanese wave had already cleared out. I’ve also heard that a few P-36 Hawks got up into the air, and managed to down a few planes, but I can’t confirm that.

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

PII

First of all, my apologies over the remark about the Hurricane, I had misread the article not realising that the Hurricane replaced the Buffalo.

Again, I repeat I believe these claims to be staggering, however I do accept your word and that of the articles author about their verification. Claims, for instance, during the Battle of Britain were often wildly exaggerated. This being no reflection on the pilots, but in a three dimensional pitched battle where a sky literally filled with a twisting melee of aircraft could suddenly clear, such was the speed at which these engagements were fought, it is easy to understand why such disparity between claims and losses actually arose. The fact that these P-40 claims were verified merely adds to the praise the P-40 (and its pilots) were due.

I labour under no preconceptions about any aircraft or its exploits. I am here to learn, but I will not blindly accept an argument if I feel the need to question it. I am willing to listen and to learn but do not really appreciate having a topic rammed into my head with a sledgehammer. Your final comment ‘Now, do you want that e-mail’ is made in a way that implies I am personally criticising or disbelieving you. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have enjoyed and LEARNED from this thread and for that I am grateful. This is my sixth contribution to this thread so you can’t say that I haven’t shown any interest.

Time to throw my toys back into the pram.

One final comment is that I have the utmost respect for those who flew and fought these engagements we enjoy talking about. It is their sense of duty, their courage and their sacrifice which has enabled us to have the freedom of speech necessary to engage in discussions like this.

Regards,

kev35

P.S Do you know anything more about the P-40’s engaged at Pearl Harbor?

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

You bring up some interesting points. The claims however in both of the first two engagements were all verified. They are all official and accounted for. If you like, I can give you the e-mail of the author of this article, and I’m sure he will tell you the same thing. The reason for the success of the P-40 in those engagements was because it was used to its strengths. The pilots of the 325th were one of the most successful outfits of the war, and they proved that the P-40 wasn’t necessarily and outmoded airplane if it was flown according to its strengths. Contrary to popular belief, the P-40 wasn’t completely inferior to the Bf-109’s it met in the MTO and (including North Africa and southern Europe), and it wasn’t outclassed by the Zero’s it met in the Pacific. Take the RNZAF for example. With their P-40’s which they operated up until late 1944, they shot down 99 Japanese aircraft, most of them Zeros, and lost only 20 of their own. That is almost a 5:1 kill ratio. Then you have the 23rd Fighter Group (formed from the remnants of the AVG when it disbanded), which operated P-40’s until fairly late in the war when they swtiched to the P-51. This fighter group was the most successful USAAF fighter group of the entire war, with close to 600 kills to its credit, and a number of losses not even nearly that high. I think their kill ratio was roughly 6:1. Supposedly, some of Russia’s aces liked the P-40 for its durability, as did most pilots, and some of their pilots did very well with the Warhawk as well. Regarding replacing the P-40, the aircraft was in production until December 1944. It fought until V-J Day. It was replaced yes, but the P-40 served throughout the entire war. The USAAF still had some in service that were redesignated ZF-40N when they USAF was officially formed in 1947. Regarding the Palm Sunday Massacre, there were only 11 Spitfires in that fight meaning the P-40’s had to do some dogfighting of their own. The reason the P-40 is sometimes thought of as an inferior fighter is because pilots in the early stages of the war (with the exception of the AVG) didn’t fly the aircraft to its strengths, which was medium and low altitude combat, often using dive slash tactics. One thing I noticed you put was that the P-40 was replaced by the Hurricane. Actually the exact opposite was true. Many British squadrons traded in their Hurricanes for the faster P-40, as they deemed the Curtiss machine a much better match for the German and Italian fighters they faced. Also, when you question those engagements, look at the overall record of the 325th. They operated three types of aircraft. They operated the P-40 until late 1943- early 1944, and then the P-47 for a short time and then finally the P-51. They were extremely successful with all three aircraft, which means two things. Firstly, it means these men were extremely skilled and very well trained and they knew what they were doing. Secondly, the three aircraft they used were good performers when used to their strengths. The 325th scored around 130 victories with the P-40, while losing only 17 P-40’s. That is a very impressive kill ratio. All the figures I’ve provided have been proven, and none of it is made up in any form or fashion. I feel you are under the impression that so many people have fallen under that the P-40 was an inferior fighter, and doesn’t deserve to be on the list of great fighters of the war. It is sad when people feel this way, but hopefully I (as well as many others) can change your perspective on one of the most successful yet misunderstood fighters of WWII. Now, do you want that e-mail?

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

PII

Interesting stories. One question about the first two stories and the astonishing successes claimed by the P-40 group. On those two occasions the P-40 group (325th) claimed 41 109’s out of a total of 76 engaged for the loss of only 2 P-40’s. Were these claims verified at the time? If they were correct can you explain why P-40’s did not achieve such success in other engagements? I would imagine that there was a certain amount of overclaiming. In the heat of a dogfight it was not uncommon for several pilots to claim the same victim as a kill, and for aircraft believed to have been destroyed to have managed to return to their bases with varying degrees of battle damage.

I’m not trying to denigrate anything these pilots have done, it just seems there must be some reason for the successes claimed on that day when the P-40 was in the process of being replaced by aircraft such as the Hurricane, P-47 and P-51.

The Palm Sunday massacre was a combat where P-40 was engaged mainly against unarmed transports with an escort which was largely engaged, I believe, against the Spitfire V’s of 92 Squadron.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

you mean I got the April Fool!
:'( Doh!!!

Neilly

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

I know, I was just kidding. I’ll be waiting for some responses though. 🙂

RE: Warhawks in North Africa

Don’t panic Phantom I read your post & I’m sure others have, too.

Neilly