Rear Life AckStar Tank Vulching!

[eskimo2]

From this month's "Aviation History" magazine, pp-27-28:

"On one of those early radar-busting missions, a ground control unit in northern Luzon asked for help in taking out a tank (Japanese) that was holding up the infantry advance.  They located the tank behind a barn, and Tatelman circled the tank (in a B-25) while a waist gunner raked it with his .50-caliber machine gun, setting it on fire and putting it out of the fight."

So there we have it, evidence of .50-cals. killing tanks and AckStaring all in one sentence!
Other parts of the article describe strafing parked Japanese planes with B-25s.

I can just hear the Japanese on the radio:
"You Damn-No-Skill-Yankee-AckStar-Vulching-Dweebs!"

eskimo

[SKurj]

Your typical 76 buick is more armored than a japanese ww2 tank...


SKurj

[BUG_EAF322]

anything can pierce toiletsteel sardina can

[hazed-]

armour on japanese tanks was about the same as the lightest of our tanks.It wouldnt surprise me if the M8 had better armour!

also it was comon for bombers to straffe targets on egress from their bomb targets.Theres quite a few mentions of it happening in the early strikes into france/holland etc by the RAF in wellingtons!.

notice it said 'set it on fire' and not destroyed though too. id imagine it was because the fuel was hit rather than penetrating armour.I very much doubt the bomber got close enough for the bullets to penetrate even the thin armour of this japanese tank.
After all a circling b26 does an extremely wide circle so in order for a waiste gunner to keep firing Id imagine it was from quite a distance.

anyway, who has said it didnt happen in war? ackstaring is just dweeby in an online game.same as kamakazi attacks on fleets.

[Wilbus]

Japanese heavy tanks were built of playwood and 1cm rice paper.

[Tac]

What's so surprising?

They are BUFF ".50 cals" arent they?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
&--|=-->>>

[Arfann]

" ackstaring is just dweeby in an online game.same as kamakazi attacks on fleets."

Kamakazi attacks? I call it dive bombing. It usually costs you your life, but that's only because fleet ack is so uber.

GronK

[Ripsnort]

Interesting on their tank fabrication has made its way into the automobile industry today.

[illo]

From battlefront.com forums (Combat Mission)
http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=023983

Airmen of all nationalities are apparently prone to overclaming, exaggeration or boosting if you will. For instance Mortain the classical example cited to prove that aircraft are efficient Panzer killers. Claims by the RAF?s 2nd tactical air force claims 140 tanks destroyed/disabled, US 9th army air force 112. These numbers actually exceeded the number deployed by the Germans. In reality only 46 tanks were lost and only 9 of these had been hit by air weapons.

Veteran stories, fantastic chaps. Know of one who was then known as Sqn leader South 42nd Sqn (iirc, have forced my father to send an email to confirm his Sqn during 44-45) flying the Tiffie or Typhoons during 44-45. He feels and thought at the time that the 2cm cannons were only any good at disabling engines through the opening on the rear of the Jerry tanks and the much more easily achieved busting tracks for a disable, guns were not tank killers. He feel that stories talking about ricochets to achieve kills through the belly are unlikely because a. no one in his Sqn was ever successful with such a techniques and b. They were told that belly armour was thicker than ?top? armour that had already proved impervious to 2cm cannon strikes. Also he notes that only the first few 2cm rounds were accurate due to the cannons having an unfortunate side effect of making the Tiffie rear due to recoil. I think you?ll find that the 2cm cannons on the Typhoons had better AP ability vs. the 12,7mm/.50cal machine guns.

You have your pilot accounts I have mine that mesh more with the figures Presented by Gooderson, Allied Fighter-Bombers Versus German Armour in North-West Europe 1944-1945: Myths and realities (Journal of strategic studies, Vol 14 No2 June 1991 pg 221), which is based on the operation research teams that investigated the wrecks found after the battle. Some of these figures are also in Jentz.

[mauser]

The title of the thread came across kinda funny... sounds like Janglish, which is what happens when someone tries to translate something literally from Japanese to English I think.  Like when you buy something that has translated assembly instructions...
http://www.engrish.com/

If we had IJA tanks, I'm pretty sure most would agree that they would be a lot easier to kill than allied and german tanks...

mauser

[Karnak]

IIRC, the Japanese had one, kinda, sorta OK tank for the Pacific and Asian environment.  They only built 100-200 of that tank, IIRC.  Mind you, this means they had a single, passable light tank.

None of their other tanks had enough armor or a big enough gun.