B-25 sinking a destroyer

[SmokinLoon]

Note that the vessel in the images is NOT a destroyer. Some websites have claimed that it is the IJN Destroyer, Amatsukaze. They are incorrect.

The ship is IJN Coastal Defense Vessel No. 134.

That was the first thing I noticed too, that is NOT a destroyer.  None the less, it is a neat photo showing the action and aftermath.

[Gman]

Anyone know what type of ordnance was used in those pictures?  In Walter J Boyne's excellent book "Clash of Wings", those very pictures are used in the book, and I've always wondered what type of bomb, and what type of attack run was used in this specific attack.

Also, in reality, how effective was that 75mm in the B25 during the war vs the Japanese navy?  What was the SOP so far as using it vs the massive 50 cal armament, not to mention the bomb load out?  It's a very interesting segment of the war in the Pacific for me, the use of medium weight twin engine bombers in an attack role vs Japanese naval ships and the like.  Does anyone have good source/link recommendations regarding this, or even some books on the subject?

[DaveBB]

Warpath across the Pacific is a great book.  Tons of pictures (including the one sinking the coastal defense ship) along with lots of first hand accounts.

[Rich46yo]

That was the first thing I noticed too, that is NOT a destroyer.  None the less, it is a neat photo showing the action and aftermath.

The life and times of coastal defense ship 134 http://www.combinedfleet.com/CD-134_t.htm    the ship itself http://www.combinedfleet.com/Type%20D.htm  Check out when most of these "very important" ship types were laid down and launched http://www.combinedfleet.com/Kaibokan.htm Basically when the jig was up and the war was lost.

[Ack-Ack]

Anyone know what type of ordnance was used in those pictures?  In Walter J Boyne's excellent book "Clash of Wings", those very pictures are used in the book, and I've always wondered what type of bomb, and what type of attack run was used in this specific attack.

For the B-25s, 500 and 1,000 pound bombs were the usual bomb loads.  Sometimes though smaller ordnance was used like 150 and 100 pound fragmentation anti-personal bombs.

Also, in reality, how effective was that 75mm in the B25 during the war vs the Japanese navy?  What was the SOP so far as using it vs the massive 50 cal armament, not to mention the bomb load out?

Not as effective as one would think.  The 5th AF determined that the B-25H with the 75mm cannon offered no advantages over specially adapted strafers outfitted with machine guns.  At the time the B-25H entered into production, enemy targets in the SWPA that required cannons to destroy were few and far inbetween and those targets vulnerable to cannon fire were also vulnerable to mass fire power of the strafers and/or bombs.  Most were passed to the 38th BG (which liked the B-25H) or returned to depots.  Some B-25Hs were used in the CBI with the 341st BG and 1st Air Commando Group which were first used on river sweeps and then on any targets of opportunity.

It's a very interesting segment of the war in the Pacific for me, the use of medium weight twin engine bombers in an attack role vs Japanese naval ships and the like.  Does anyone have good source/link recommendations regarding this, or even some books on the subject?

The B-25 proved to be very effective against Japanese naval targets, especially when using the masthead bombing technique as it was more accurate then skip bombing.  You'll find this report interesting, it goes over the use of skip bombing and masthead bombing during the Battle of the Bismark Sea.

UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET - AIRCRAFT SOUTH PACIFIC FORCE - REPORT OF MASTHEAD BOMBING

This is a cool video of the B-25H in action with the 41st BG/48th BS in the SWPA.
WWII B-25 Squadron in Action part 4 of 4

ack-ack

[Brooke]

Nice links, Akak.  Thanks. 

[Oldman731]

Nice links, Akak.  Thanks. 

Agreed.

- oldman

[Gman]

Perfect, thanks AckAck, going to read/watch that now.

[Ack-Ack]

One interesting comment in the report I linked dispells the myth that heavy bombers were ineffective against maneuvering ships when level bombing.

One heavy bomb group in the Fifth Air Force has employed high level daylight bombing at 6500 to 7500 feet on practically all targets (land and sea) and has achieved remarkable results.

B-17's led the attack and were given pursuit protection by P-38's. The B-17's bombed from about 7500 feet, apparently causing considerable confusion among the vessels attacked, as well as scoring several direct hits starting fires on the vessels.

ack-ack

[Rich46yo]

A PDF of interest http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CEAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Faupress.au.af.mil%2Fdigital%2Fpdf%2Fpaper%2Ft_gann_fifth_air_force.pdf&ei=jIpOU_XdBoOcyQHzmoHwDw&usg=AFQjCNERTR48kJXm7VbU_q3rcEa2jEnEzg&sig2=AQmxygpZLaYfLtyOxe6bHQ&bvm=bv.64764171,d.aWc

Let me know if your unable to download it. It goes into great detail how the operational doctrine evolved. Even the multi HMG gun packs in the medium bombers were originally field mods.

Interesting to note how much code breakers help the shipping air war in SWA.

1st time Ive ever seen actual video of the B-25s 75mm cannon ever go off.

I know what kind of AA they were flying into when they attacks shipping protected by the IJN but does anyone have references to the types of AA they flew into when attacking IJA bases?