Douglas Dauntless, as a fighter?!!

I just finished re-reading ‘Samurai’ a couple weeks ago. An interesting read.
From Sakai’s account during early August of 1942…

He states he did give chase and shot it down (his 60th kill) the gunner being killed in the aircraft and the pilot taking to the silk.

That SBD was piloted by Lt. Dudley H. Adams of VS-71; he did indeed bailout and survive, but his gunner, AR3C Harry E. Elliot was killed. It was August 7, 1942, first air battles over Guadalcanal: US carrier air groups escorting the invasion force, v Sakai’s Tainan Air Group flying out of Rabaul.

Note that in “Samurai” immediately after that, it says Sakai attacked planes he thought were fighters from behind, but they were Avengers and he was wounded in the head by one of the tunnel gunners. In fact those were also SBD’s, probably the mixed formation of VB-6 and VS-5 which claimed a Zero of two (Sakai and his wingman per his later account) that attacked them from behind, no Avengers made any claim.

Source here is Sakaida, “Winged Samurai” which analyzed and revisited incidents in “Samurai”, with Sakai’s cooperation, to fill in information from the Allied side, as well as address certain details in “Samurai” that seem to have been embellishments by the real author, Martin Caidin. Caidin didn’t speak Japanese, and apparently never dealt with Sakai in person, but via notes of translated answers to written questions.

Joe

@ contrailjj- thank you very much 🙂 🙂

I have read long time ago “Samurai” by Saburo Sakai and I think he is mentioned that he was once attack by this plane from cloud. To regret I don’t have this book any more and hope that somebody could confirm this.

Cheers

I just finished re-reading ‘Samurai’ a couple weeks ago. An interesting read.
From Sakai’s account during early August of 1942…

” Meanwhile I returned to 7,000 feet…
…No sooner had we emerged from one cloud than, for the first time in all my years of combat, an enemy plane caught me unawares. I felt a heavy thud, the scream of a bullet, and a hole two inches across appeared through the cockpit glass to my left, only inches away from my face.
” I still had not seen any other planes in the air. It might have been ground fire which hit me. Then I caught a glimpse of an enemy bomber—not a fighter!—which had caught me napping. The Dauntless hung on its wing, racing for cloud cover. The audacity of the enemy pilot was amazing; he had deliberately jumped four Zero fighters in a slow and lightly armed dive bomber.”

He states he did give chase and shot it down (his 60th kill) the gunner being killed in the aircraft and the pilot taking to the silk.

JJ

I have read long time ago “Samurai” by Saburo Sakai and I think he is mentioned that he was once attack by this plane from cloud. To regret I don’t have this book any more and hope that somebody could confirm this.

Cheers

The Japanese Air groups as well as the Luftwaffe started off with well trained crews, but as the was progressed, both of them spent less and less on training as desperation grew. Both the RAF and the USAAF took a while to spool up training and initially cut corners with disastrous results.

..It didn’t help that well-trained pre-war RAF and Fleet Air Arm crews were all but thrown away early in the war on missions that should not have been allowed to happen, with tactics that were not so much flawed as utterly lacking in merit.

…But that’s another story.

Aerial combat over the years has proven that there is much more to winning in aerial combat than just superior aircraft. Training and tactics have much over technical superiority. There have been many mismatched contests that have been won by the “inferior” “obsolete” aircraft. Take a look at the Finnish AF. Their Brewster Baffalo’s claimed quite a few frontline aircraft like Hurricanes, Spitfires, and Tomahawks.

The Japanese Air groups as well as the Luftwaffe started off with well trained crews, but as the was progressed, both of them spent less and less on training as desperation grew. Both the RAF and the USAAF took a while to spool up training and initially cut corners with disastrous results.

We know from hindsight that the Dauntless was not the ideal offensive aerial gun platform and that the tactics for using it as such were quite outdated. This was a stopgap, last resort sort of operation. It did not stop the crews of the time in using it to the best of their abilities under horrific circumstances.

You simply do what you have to do or die trying!

I would like to add, that the RAF were also using some strange machines as fighters.

98 Squadron RAF Coastal Command used Battles as fighters against He 111´s in Iceland during the winter and spring of 1941. The only He 111 that came within range during that period escped unharmed because the Battle could not catch it:eek:

Then there’s the Blenheim MkIVF ‘fighter’, some 20mph slower than the bomber version.

Need I even mention the Blackburn Roc?

” Those who can…..do,
Those who can not…..teach”

Those who cannot communicate…..become engineers,
Those who cannot understand how it works or why it is needed…..are hired as senior management,
Those who do not know what you are talking about…..enter politics!

I would like to add, that the RAF were also using some strange machines as fighters.

98 Squadron RAF Coastal Command used Battles as fighters against He 111´s in Iceland during the winter and spring of 1941. The only He 111 that came within range during that period escped unharmed because the Battle could not catch it:eek:

“probably the equivilent to sending an A-6 Intruder to attack an Su-24 Fencer.”

The planned (but cancelled) A-6F(new-build) and A-6G(upgraded A-6E) programs of the mid-1980s would have added a pylon under each outer wing panel for AMRAAM missiles.

The Bucc carried 2 Sidewinders… as did the A-7E.

On the second day of the Battle of the Coral Sea, Vejtasa was leading 4 of the 8 Douglas SBDs assigned anti-torpedo patrol duty. … He downed three Zeros that day; but when the dogfight was over, only half of the SBDs returned to the USS Yorktown.

As posted above, the 4 SBD’s were downed, but the 4 Zeroes (3 by Vejtas and one other) were not. The Zeroes were from Zuikaku’s fighter squadron, 6 of them, and they suffered no loss, per Lundstrom in “First Team”. He pretty minutely reconstructed the air combats in the ’42 carrier battles using both sides’ records; that’s 20+ years ago, not refuted by anyone else, but still the one sided claims are repeated.

However in some of the later 1942 engagements of Zeroes against unescorted SBD’s the SBD’s did seem to be more survivable than some other attack types v the Zero, or than other excellent dive bomber types against fighters they faced (Ju-87, Japanese Type 99 etc).

For example Hornet SBD’s strike on Shokaku at Santa Cruz in October 1942: the 15 SBD’s were attacked, unescorted, by 11 Zeroes of the CAP, fought them off shooting down two Zeroes (confirmed in Japanese records), losing 2 SBD’s, then hit Shokaku with several bombs. And in that battle too several lone [or pairs of] scouting SBD’s were intercepted by multiple Zeroes and survived, in some cases claiming Zeroes, though none of those claims correspond to real Zero losses. Still small numbers of other attack types were total cold turkey when caught by Zeroes. The SBD seemed more survivable than some contemporary attack a/c, though agreed: it was no fighter.

Joe

Thanks Malcolm. Oh, it was an event alright, it was a disaster. One of the downed crew were killed by natives, too.

Yes I reckon you’ve summed it up James 😀 Getting killed by one of the locals was piece of bad luck. But then I suspect the locals were getting a bit peed off with all these foreigners fighting wars in their country.

However, that aside, I agree that it was a reasonably handy aircraft, but that was never enough against faster more manoeverable opposition like the A6M. There is a parallel incident where such aggressive behaviour in an outmoded aircraft was noted and that was that famed fight between an RAAF Hudson and an A6M, the pilot of which noted that he had never seen such a brave defensive action fought by a bomber. The Hudson was downed but it was an epic contest.

As you say its not the planes its the pilots who fly them that matter.

Weird probably the equivilent to sending a A-6 intruder to attack a su-24 fencer.

That’s the assumption made. Actually, the pre-war naval aircraft theory was utterly different to what happened in W.W.II; many of the assumptions were proven wrong, and the Zero was the most famous example of that.

That was the land based version – the A24 Banshee. It was a non-event in military terms and was quickly withdrawn. Of 7 A24s sent to attack Buna only 1 survived

Thanks Malcolm.

Oh, it was an event alright, it was a disaster. One of the downed crew were killed by natives, too.

What’s often forgotten was the early days of the Pacific was were desperate, tactically, on experience and utterly inadequate numbers of badly fitted out utterly inadequate aircraft.

The only possible way the old Slow But Deadly could function as a fighter would be if the enemy conveniently flew in front of it long enough for the SBD pilot to shoot it down with his two mgs.

Check the link from the Wikipedia page in the provided ref:

On the second day of the Battle of the Coral Sea, Vejtasa was leading 4 of the 8 Douglas SBDs assigned anti-torpedo patrol duty. He suddenly found himself alone and under attack by 8 Mitsubishi Zeros. A wild dogfight ensued, with no quarter given by either side. Remembering lessons his skipper had emphasized, “Swede” defended himself. Turning into every attack, he was able to increase the angle of deflection for the enemy fighters and maneuver into position to use his own forward-firing .30 caliber guns. He downed three Zeros that day; but when the dogfight was over, only half of the SBDs returned to the USS Yorktown.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/goe/eaglebios/96bios/vejtas96.htm

Going back to another discussion (109 or Spitfire, which was ‘superior’) here the pilot’s quality, training and attitude makes more of a combat difference than the aircraft’s own performance.

A good pilot in a ‘bad’ aircraft is better than a poor pilot in a ‘good’ aircraft.

The RN considered its equivalent the Blackburn Skua as a fleet fighter as well as a dive bomber.

There was a US Army group constituted of Dauntlesses (under the US name) in Northern Australia and thrown into battle because there was nothing better around – let alone Hellcats…

That was the land based version – the A24 Banshee. It was a non-event in military terms and was quickly withdrawn. Of 7 A24s sent to attack Buna only 1 survived and there were some ops flown in Indonesia against the Japanese – the account says “with a spectacular lack of success”.

The only possible way the old Slow But Deadly could function as a fighter would be if the enemy conveniently flew in front of it long enough for the SBD pilot to shoot it down with his two mgs.

However, like all dive bombers, it was a very good against ships and stationary lightly defended targets. It’s crowning achievement was Midway.

5 were acquired by the the FAA but after testing were quickly rejected, by that time there were far better carrier borne attack aircraft available.

It was a very important aircraft, but no fighter. The French used them post-war in Indo China IIRC.

The RN considered its equivalent the Blackburn Skua as a fleet fighter as well as a dive bomber.

There was a US Army group constituted of Dauntlesses (under the US name) in Northern Australia and thrown into battle because there was nothing better around – let alone Hellcats…

Weird probably the equivilent to sending a A-6 intruder to attack a su-24 fencer.
At least the Gladbags were fighters . Wonder if the US Navy considered an air defence role for its Helldivers since they had had adequate Armament compared to the SBD’s mediorce ones

Using scout bomber type a/c as anti-torpedo plane CAP was a leftover prewar tactic in the USN. It assumed the torpedo bombers would be going a lot slower than the SB could, especially in order to drop its torpedo without breaking it. The USN only used the tactic once in combat, in the first carrier battle at Coral Sea in May 1942. The actual outcome was disastrous, with the enemy B5N’s (Type 97 Carrier Attack Plane, ‘Kate’) getting past the SBD’s untouched, since they were almost as fast and didn’t need to slow down to avoid breaking their torpedoes, then several SBD’s were lost to the escorting A6M’s (Zeroes). That failure was somewhat mitigated at the time by claims of the SBD’s to have downed some Zeroes, including 3 by just one SBD crew, but those claims don’t check out in Japanese records (although the were only recently reenacted again, with computer graphics, on the History Channel “Dogfights” TV series; although to be fair that show has no monopoly on repeating overclaims years after they’ve been shown to be overclaims, it’s part and parcel of popular “air war history” worldwide, sorry to say).

In any case the SBD anti-torpedo CAP tactic was never repeated after Coral Sea. SBD’s claimed some Zeroes when intercepted by them on scouting and bombing missions; and a few of those claims correspond to real Japanese losses. One famous real victory, or sorts, by SBD’s was wounding the leading Japanese Navy ace Saburo Sakai, in the first air combat over Guadalcanal in August 1942. His ghost written English language autobiography said Avengers hit him, but it’s not certain he ever really said that, and in any case it’s obvious from recontructing the combat that it was a formation of SBD’s. One rear gunner was credited with a Zero destroyed, though Sakai miraculously made it back to base with a head wound.

Joe

Not exactly the best A/C for the job, but when you are outnumbered you have to use what you have. The Dauntless was faster and had a better rate of climb than the Kate, but only two little guns to make little holes.

Should the RAF not used Gladiators a Malta just because they were old and slow? You use the resources at hand. I imagine the USN Wildcats were busy with those pesky Zeros!

How about a T-6 with Guns??;)