Author Topic: 348th Fighter Group in WW II (Read 497 times)

Vector · « **on:** February 23, 2002, 07:36:05 AM »

Just finished John Stanaway's book "Kearby's Thunderbolts - The 348th Fighter Group in World War II". Was superb reading, highly recommended. In addition to complete history of 348th FG, book describes huge amount of hot detailed air to air combats. Tangles with zekes, oscars and franks. 348th FG had great trust on themselves as well as their beloved thunderbolts and 348th Fighter Group Commander Neel Kearby. Kearby was an aggressive pilot always seeking for fight (regardless of his commanders who tried to keep him grounded, as he was too valuable to lose in combat). No matter how outnumbered and how disadvantage they were, he led his flight to attack without hesitation. He knew his pilots and their skills as he trained them before entering SWPTO. Ironically, Neel Kearby was one of the very few to die by the enemy in 348th FG, most of the casualties were caused by bad weather, bad runways and technical malfunctions.

348th FG developed outstanding skills on air to ground attacks, even Commanding Generals of infantry officially commended 348th FG for their skills. During April 1945 348th FG dropped 2.091 tons of bombs, of which 2.068 tons were checked direct hits on pin-point targets. During this month 348th FG also achieved 251 air to air kills with loss of only one pilot. They flew as many as 200 sorties per day. The one verbal commendation seemed to valued 348th FG's veterans mostly;"Fifth Air Force news release dated June 1, 1945:"FIFTH AIR FORCE, PHILIPPINES...FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THIS WAR A FIGHTER GROUP HAS DROPPED A GREATER TONNAGE OF BOMBS DURING A SINGLE MONTH THAN ANY SINGLE HEAVY BOMBER GROUP.", althought 348th FG was awarded "The distinguished squadron" -awards three times.

348th Fighter Group was most successful fighter group in pacific.

Sancho · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2002, 12:02:04 PM »

janne, did they fly many missions early on without drop tanks? when did they first start using drop tanks and were there P-47D-2s equipped to handle DTs from the start or was there a retrofit needed to accommodate DTs?

Vector · « **Reply #2 on:** February 26, 2002, 12:21:53 PM »

Hi sancho

When 348th FG arrived in SWPA there was shortage on everything. Maintenence crews had hard time to get parts and so on. 5th AF General Kenney bemoaned that SWPA was second in importance compared to those in ETO. "They are developing planes with no more range than is needed to defend London or to make a fighter sweep across a ditch no bigger than Chesapeake Bay".
Kenney was pleased to have new P-47's instead of P-40's that HQ offered. However P-47's short range was main concern to him. No tanks had been sent with 348th FG fighters and it was discovered that Materiel Command's 200 gallon tank was unusable because of the tail buffeting it caused. 27th Depot Repair Squadron was ordered to design as quickly as possible a suitable tank. At first, 110 gallon tank used by P-39's and P-40s was modified to fit P-47s. Finally, an effective 200 gallon tank was developed by the beginning of August 1943. The 27th Repair Squadron installed new tank and found it could be adapted to the P-47s with few modifications of existing booster pumps and motors. The tank was superior to the tanks being developed in the United States and become a standard in the SWP.

note! the new 200 gallon tank is in foreground

On later models where wing pylons were added, P-38's droptanks were used and they were found highly succesful.

348th FG started its operational sorties around the beginning of August 1943, about the same time 200-gallon tanks were developed. No mentioning about combat sorties before this.

Sancho · « **Reply #3 on:** February 27, 2002, 05:33:37 PM »

outstanding. thanks.

Vector · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2002, 11:28:21 AM »

np sancho

While we're at the tanks, I'm sure you can give some info about this:

The ultimate papertank!
Did 56th FG or any other FG in ETO actually use them?

Btw, thanks for you prop info. I desperately browsed 348th FG book to find any mentioning of paddle blade props, but nothing!
I even double checked all pictures to see any wide blades, but only wide ones were D-23's props. It seems that Kenney's statement was right about pacific being second in importance. Gotta give up the "gimme gimme gimme paddle blade" -moaning and start to act like a man.

GIMME GIMME GIMME P-47D-23!!!

Kronos · « **Reply #5 on:** March 17, 2002, 11:44:22 AM »

I also have been doing some reading about the 348th FG. The thing that strikes me most is this :

Col. Kearby would take a flight of 4 P47's out to Wewak for patrols, right over the base, normally starting around 25K. They would attack flights of 30 or more enemy fighters, a disparity of over 7 to 1 odds, and come out unscathed or with maybe 1 loss for 6 to 7 aircraft destroyed + probables. They would do this while firing at 400 yds or less at most, and doing about 400 mph.
They would attack from behind the sun (which I think should be more of a factor in Aces High) and completely surprise the enemy. The most troublesome opponent for them was apparently the Tony, and that was only at low altitudes. They really didnt use much ACM as we think of it, except to dive, attack, climb, and dive again.

I seriously recommend this book for any avid P47 lover.

fdiron · « **Reply #6 on:** March 17, 2002, 02:47:02 PM »

If AH didnt have icons I think we would see alot more similarities in air combat.

Kronos · « **Reply #7 on:** March 17, 2002, 03:09:13 PM »

CC your prolly right. I flew in the CT right after it started up with all icons off, and it was a completely new experience. It was just hard to judge the distance of the con, especially when trying to get a shot off. Identifying the con was not so difficult, but the distance was a big thing.