Photos of 5th Sentai and 13th Sentai Ki-45s?

 

JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya

 

Posted By: Gordon <gordonc@adf-serials.com>

Date: Friday, 23 August 2002, at 1:28 a.m.

 

In Francilion he lists the order of battle for the IJAAF on the eve(?) of the Malayan campaign. This includes 4 Hikodan (3rd, 7th, 10th and 12th) plus 2 Dokuritsu Hikotai (15th and 83rd). This list differs from that published in "Empire of the Sun".

 

Can anyone advise which is correct (or the most uptodate)? Is there any recent research that makes any correction to Francilion's order of battle?

 

"Bloody Shambles"

 

Posted By: Garth <kkoori@hotmail.com>

Date: Saturday, 24 August 2002, at 1:00 a.m.

 

In Response To: JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya (Gordon)

 

Have you had the chance to check out "Bloody Shambles"? It might be able to assist you with your search.

 

In case you don't have any details on the book, this is from our book database at work (Australian War Memorial). . .

 

Title: Bloody shambles / Christopher Shores and Brian Cull with Yasuho Izawa.

Author: Shores, Christopher F., 1937-;Cull, Brian.;Izawa, Yasuho, 1943-;

Citation: bnb94881750

Pagination: 2 v. : ill., map, ports. ; 23 cm.

Type: Monograph

Publisher: London : Grub Street,

Year: 1992.

Subject: World War, 1939-1945 - Philippines - Aerial operations.;World War, 1939-1945 - Malaya - Aerial operations.;World War, 1939-1945 - Singapore - Aerial operations.;World War, 1939-1945 - Burma - Aerial operations.;World War, 1939-1945 - Asia, Southeastern - Aerial operations.;

 

Hope that helps, I too am very interested in the Malayan Campaign, I'll be in Butterworth later this year with my Company for four months so I'll try and get around to as many sites as possible :)

 

Re: JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya

 

Posted By: Gordon <gordonc@adf-serials.com>

Date: Wednesday, 4 September 2002, at 10:42 p.m.

 

In Response To: JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya (Gordon)

 

3rd Army Air Force Division (8/12/41)

HQ at Konpong Trach, Indo China

 

3rd Hikodan

27th Sentai 23 Ki-51 SONIA

59th Sentai 24 Ki-43 OSCAR

75th Sentai 25 Ki-48 LILY

90th Sentai 30 Ki-48 LILY & Ki-30 ANN

 

7th Hikodan

12th Sentai 21 Ki-21 SALLY

60th Sentai 39 Ki-21 SALLY

64th Sentai 35 Ki-43 OSCAR & 6 Ki-27 NATE

98th Sentai 42 Ki-21 SALLY

 

10th Hikodan

31st Sentai 24 Ki-30 ANN

62nd Sentai 22 Ki-21 SALLY

77th Sentai 27 Ki-27 NATE

70th Chutai 8 Ki-15 BABS

 

12th Hikodan

1st Sentai 42 Ki-27 NATE

11th Sentai 39 Ki-27 NATE

 

15th Dokuritsu Hikotai

50th Chutai 3 Ki-15 BABS & 2 Ki-46 DINAH

51st Chutai 3 Ki-15 BABS & 3 Ki-46 DINAH

 

83rd Dokuritsu Hikotai

71st Chutai 10 Ki-51 SONIA

73rd Chutai 9 Ki-51 SONIA

89th Chutai 12 Ki-36 IDA

 

81st Sentai 9 Ki-15 BABS & 7 Ki-46 DINAH

 

12th Chutai ? Ki-57 TOPSY

 

The above list comes from Francillon.

 

Now from a comprehensive list of the JIAAF from the web (freeport-tech.com/wwii), thanks Allan,

differs from the above list in the following ways.

1. it has the 59th Sentai as having Ki-27b Nates rather than the Oscars

but the number used is the same.

2. it differs in the number of Nates with the 77th Sentai having 36

instead of 27.

3. it has the 51st Chutai under the 7th Hikodan rather than the 15th DH

as above

4. it doesn't list the 83rd DH as being in the order of battle

5. it doesn't list the 12th Chutai as being in the order of battle

 

Then from "Emblems of the Rising Sun" the OoB there differs from

Fancillon's list in the following ways.

1. it has the 81st Sentai under the 12th Hikodan (which of course

differs from the web list)

2. it has the 12th Chutai under the 83rd DH (again differing from the

web list)

 

Anyone able to confirm any of the above or shed any light on this Order of Battle for the Malayan campaign by the IJAAF.

 

Re: JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya

 

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>

Date: Thursday, 5 September 2002, at 5:54 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: JIAAF Order of Battle - malaya (Gordon)

 

The first list (Francillon) is organizational identical to that given in: Southwest Area Air Operations, Phase 1 (Nov.41-Feb. 42), Japanese Monograph No.55. Some of the numbers of aircraft differ slightly. The 59th is crdited with 21 type 1 fighters and 3 type 97, for example. The 27th is reported as 28 and the 90th 23 aircraft (only type 99 TE light bombers mentioned in that case). And a few others.

 

The monograph is a very good secondary source written immediately after the war by Japanese officers with access to available records. Having said that I also have some primary source records that differ slightly. A 1 Sep 42 report on aircraft loss experience states thew 59th started the campaign with 25 type 1 fighters. The same document also indicates that each of the Hikodan HQ had 3 a/c assigned directly, generally a fighter, a trainer and a transport plane.

 

One other point the highest level headquarters (3d Air Div) was not a Division at this point it was 3d Air Group (Shudan not Shidan). It was not promoted to a Division until June 42.

 

p.s. As a slight amendment to my article on Ki 43-I armament (posted on this site), based on additional evidence, it now appears that the 64th operated Ki 43s armed mainly with 2x12.7mm in the first month of the campaign and the 59th also had some of these early production a/c. By early January the 59th had few if any 2x12.7mm a/c and was operating mostly mixed (1x12.7 and 1x7.7) a/c. By the end of the campaign the same was true for the 64th.

 

intercepts over the Hump

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Tuesday, 6 August 2002, at 7:10 p.m.

 

Were the Japanese attempting to intercept the a/c flying over the Hump in late 1943? If so, did they achieve any successes or losses? Which units were engaged?

 

27 Oct 43 Example

 

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>

Date: Wednesday, 7 August 2002, at 6:25 a.m.

 

In Response To: intercepts over the Hump (Franek Grabowski)

 

Here is one example I have handy.On 27 October 43 six B-24s were engaged in resupply missions over the hump. These aircraft were attacked north of Sumprabum on both east and wastbound flights. On the return flight all six were damaged. On the same day a C-46 was lost and believed shot down near Ft. Herz.

 

According to 1/Lt. Noriyuki Saito several Type 1 model 2 fighters of 50 FR deployed to Loiwing. These were aircraft from Nos. 1 and 3 chutai. A formation of seven under Capt. Hashimoto (3 plane flight) and Capt. Takemori (4 plane flight) flew from Loiwing and about 1400 intercepted six B-24s. The two Japanese sections became separated and attacked independently. Saito was in Hashimoto's formation and was hit during his second pass. He crash landed and was later overwhelmed by Burmese natives who turned him over to Allied troops after a ten day trek. According to Saito the Hayabusas had orders to return direct to Heho after the attack. One other 50 FR pilot was lost in this attack.

 

I believe there are examples as well but since I had the details on this one I thought I'd pass it along.

 

Re: 27 Oct 43 Example

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Thursday, 8 August 2002, at 2:38 p.m.

 

In Response To: 27 Oct 43 Example (richard dunn)

 

I understand that the above info comes from the interrogation report of 1/Lt. Saito. Are there no Japanese documents of the period (not that I'd be surprised) as the ones once supplied by you or you just don't have them at hand? Nevermind. Could I assume the 50 Sentai was the only unit engaged in the Hump intercepts in October 1943?

The reason of the question is again Urbanowicz. In his memoirs he mentions significance of Japanese threat on the supply sorties. According to him, he did one escort sortie over the Hump flown out of Kunming. I don't have any reliable data on the early period of his flying in China, apart of possible date of his first sortie - 23.10.1943. AFAIK no sorties were flown by 23FG at the above date, so I assume he might have been flying over the Hump at the time. According to U. memories he had a squirmish with Japanese fighters which could lead to destruction of some IJA a/c due to weather conditions.

Unfortunatelly I was unable to find anything to put that event in a wider perspective, either American or Japanese.

 

Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250

 

Posted By: Bryan C <bryanac625@yahoo.com>

Date: Saturday, 27 July 2002, at 6:10 a.m.

 

My it's been quite a while since I posted. I have some questions regarding the planes that intercepted a/c #10 (40-2250) of the Doolittle Raid. I understand this plane was intercepted by a "twin-engined patrol plane (probably Kawasaki Ki45-Kai) that dove to attack," and several Ki27 Nates also intercepted.

 

Does anyone know what these a/c would have looked like... I mean what their markings would have been? What would be any similarites/differences between a Ki45 of 1942 and the 1/48 Tamiya Ki45 kit?

 

Re: Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250

 

Posted By: Grant Goodale <grant.goodale@sympatico.ca>

Date: Saturday, 27 July 2002, at 7:30 a.m.

 

In Response To: Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250 (Bryan C)

 

I could stand to be corrected on this one but, according to Francillon, "the first unit taking delivery of the Toryu was the 5th Sentai at Kashiwa, Chiba Prefecture, which received it Ki-45 KAIas in August 1942." With the Dolittle raid in April 1942, the Ki-45 could be ruled out.

 

Re: Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Sunday, 28 July 2002, at 12:29 a.m.

 

In Response To: Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250 (Bryan C)

 

Don't know about this specific B-25 (who was the pilot?) but the 5th Sentai was involved in interceptions of Doolittle raiders with Ki-27 aircraft.

 

These were overall light grey-green (hairyokushoku) with plain red hinomaru in four wing positions. Unit marking was a pair of diagonal bands from the top rear of rudder to the lower fuselage just forward of the tail. White with red edge for 1st Chutai, red with yellow edge for 2nd Chutai and yellow with red edge for 3rd Chutai. In addition horizontal fuselage bands were displayed in various colour combinations. For example Lt Baba's aircraft (3rd Chutai) wore a single white fuselage band edged in red in the same position as the so-caled "combat stripe" (senchi hyoshiki)

 

Captain Charles R Greening's B-25 was also attacked by Lt Umekawa from Mito flying a test model of the Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien. Umekawa broke of his treetop attack because of low fuel and problems with firing his guns. Greening identified his attacker as a "Messerschmitt". Probable appearance of Umekawa's Hien was overall natural metal with grey-green flying surfaces, plain red hinomaru in six positions and a single red horizontal fuselage band. I don't know if Mito insignia was worn on the tail but if so that was a red outline five-petalled flower with three blue "T"-shaped characters inside arranged in a circle. I can send you a scan if you need it.

 

Twin-engined aircraft an Irving?

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Sunday, 28 July 2002, at 1:16 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Interceptors of Doolittle Raider 40-2250 (Nick Millman)

 

The twin-engine "patrol plane" may have been a Nakajima JiNi Irving of the Yokosuka Kokutai flown by Chief Flight Petty Officer Satoru Ono.

 

On a training flight from Kisarazu, the day before departure to join the Tainan Ku at Rabaul for operational service testing, the Yokosuka Kokutai aircraft stumbled into Doolittle's raid. Ono noticed anti-aircraft fire and observed an "unfamiliar looking twin-tail, twin engined aircraft heading in their direction".

 

The Yokosuka aircraft's weapons were not loaded so Ono dived to evade the enemy aircraft.

 

INFORMATION NEEDED

 

Posted By: emmer <emmer@xs4all.nl>

Date: Tuesday, 2 July 2002, at 5:09 a.m.

 

Desperate need information about the 64th SENTAI, and his Chutais, especially the 1st Chutai...Information has to be on squadlogo.emblems colors etc...planes they flew....

 

64th Sentai markings

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Wednesday, 3 July 2002, at 1:13 p.m.

 

In Response To: INFORMATION NEEDED!!!!! (emmer)

 

The tail marking of the 64th Sentai was a stylised diagonal arrow in the chutai (squadron) colour (see below). The arrow was positioned pointing down and forward from the upper rear to the lower front of the fin. The top edge of the arrow "head" conformed to the sloping edge of the fin.

 

Early in the war the arrow was white with a thin red edging for the 1st Chutai, red with thin white edging for the 2nd Chutai and yellow with thin red edging for the 3rd Chutai. The Sentai HQ flight was said to be distinguished by a white arrow with thin blue edging. Later in the war the tail arrow of the 1st Chutai became plain white (without edging) and the 3rd Chutai yellow with white edging.

 

Chutai and hentai (flight) leaders aircraft were distinguished by a diagonal fuselage band running from upper rear to lower front reflecting the Chutai colour order. Thus the aircraft of the 2nd Hentai leader of the 3rd Chutai had a yellow tail arrow but a red fuselage band. There were exceptions to this and anomalies.

 

The 64th Sentai flew various models of the Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa "Oscar" almost exclusively throughout the war, although they also had a few Nakajima Ki-44 Shoki "Tojo" aircraft on strength. Early model Oscars carried no fuselage roundels and plain red discs above and below the wings.

 

Colour schemes deserve a book! They demonstrated incredible variety even within the same time periods. A former 64th Sentai pilot emphasised, when pressed to recall the colours of the early war Hayabusa, that not only did the shade of dark green vary from aircraft to aircraft but even varied on the same aircraft as a result of wear, fading and repairs. In Burma paint from various sources was applied, including captured RAF and RN paint, and locally procured commercial paint. RAF intelligence reports of the examinations of wrecked and abandoned aircraft corroborate the diversity of colour and style.

 

Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Thursday, 4 July 2002, at 6:03 p.m.

 

On the above date 16, 26 & 75 FS straffed Pailuchi A/F and subsequently 3-0-1 Lily as well as 0-0-1 single engined a/c were claimed on the ground. Does anyone know official name of the base as well as which unit operated from there? Any comments on a/c and possible losses are also very welcome.

 

PS For Richard Dunn, as yet I've got 8 serials for 75's P-40Ms. Unfortunatelly no breakdown for their period of service.

 

Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15

 

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>

Date: Friday, 5 July 2002, at 3:00 p.m.

 

In Response To: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (Franek Grabowski)

 

Don't have information specific to the 15th but a few days earlier 1/85 FR used it as an advanced fueling base. A twin engine high altitude training plane was used to transport maintenance personnel. As late as 13 Dec at least part of the 1/85 was operating from there.

 

Don't think "Pai Lo Chi" was ever a permanent base. It was a forward operating base for some offensive operations and defensive patrols over the Yangtze River.

 

As for Lilys on Pai Lo Chi, I think both 16 FR and a chutai 90 FR were operating type 99 light bombers in the area at that time.

 

I'll let you know if I find more specifics regarding the 75th and P-40Ms. Glad you found something as well!

 

Hope someone else can answer your question more directly but thought I'd pass this along for what it's worth.

 

Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Friday, 5 July 2002, at 6:46 p.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (richard dunn)

 

Well, any informative answer is always welcome.

What struck me in the records was the note the A/F had no defence and nobody fired at US a/c. I've even wondered if it was a decoy site.

As to the a/c on the A/F. One of SEA was described as an scout bomber with raised greenhouse, while another remained unidentified. Total of five Lilys also seen and that's all. I'd say too many for a fighter unit's transports but who knows.

Little help I'm afraid but certainly adding to the confusion. ;)

Could you clear Lilys with 16 FR and 90 FR comment? Do I have to understand they were used as transports or bombers?

Regarding P-40s, I'd be more interested in Ks & Ns as those were ones flown by Urbanowicz. Otherwise I've found nothing, just knew whom to ask. ;)

Now I'm waiting for replies from 75th vets.

 

Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Saturday, 6 July 2002, at 12:48 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (Franek Grabowski)

 

it wasn't a decoy site but as Rick states a re-fuelling or "staging" field. It was SOP in CBI for the JAAF to hold air units on rear airfields as permanent or semi-permanent bases and move them forward through staging fields for specific operations. This was aided by the deployment of the detached airfield battalions (Hikojo Daitai) which could service the aircraft staging through the fields.

 

The central China fields can be confused by the use of various Chinese names and the Japanese translations. Sometimes the nearest town name is used instead of the specific field or village name. The existence of multiple satellite or dispersal fields further confuses the modern student.

 

Molesworth identifies the field as a "major base" - but I think that refers to its strategic position rather than the size or occupancy. In the Hunan-Kwangsi operation from May 1944 the field was used by the 1st Air Brigade, 25th & 48th Sentai (Ki-43).

 

The field was also attacked in a series of raids by the 5th Fighter Group, CACW, in July 1944 and was found to be "crowded with Oscars" and transport planes. Many of the Oscars were noted as being plain silver.

 

Both 16th and 90th Sentai used Lilys (Ki-48). Monograph 76 lists the 16th with the Type 99 but notes that they were converting to "Model 2 light bombers" (?) in Shanghai and Japan in September 1943. It is not clear if this means the Ki-48 II. Some sources show the 16th as also having the Ki-45 on strength and it is interesting that aircraft was known as the "Type 2 two-seat fighter". The possibility of a light bomber version of the Ki-45 has cropped up before. The obsolence of the Ki-48 was understood and 5th Air Army orders later specified:

 

"Type 99 light bombers will assault and destroy enemy planes in night attacks on enemy airfields . . ."

 

The SE scout bomber with raised greenhouse was probably a Ki-51 Sonia of the 44th Sentai or 54th Independent Chutai which were operating in China at the time.

 

I don't have a handle on all the transport units present in central China at this time but one could expect to find Ki-54 and Ki-57 in numbers.

 

I hope this little helps or is at least of some interest. I would be very interested in the P-40M serial numbers.

 

Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Saturday, 6 July 2002, at 9:28 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (Nick Millman)

 

Now everything gets clear! I've to say that Japanese strategy seems very intelligent, wise and flexible, though I'm curious how actually this worked.

Another question is how those A/F were cared of? I understand that there must have been some crew keeping care of ammunition and fuel stocks not to mention basic infrastructure. Was everything movable?

I also ununderstand that Ki-51s of 44 Sentai / 54 Chutai weren't attributed to any A/F and could have been based anywhere on mainland.

 

JAAF Logistics

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Sunday, 7 July 2002, at 1:30 p.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (Franek Grabowski)

 

Ok, this seems to puzzle a lot of people but we must put the idea of the "modern" air base with permanent occupying units out of our heads when considering JAAF operations in CBI. The JAAF infrastructure was flexible and was one of the reasons they were able to maintain operations for so long in the face of both air superiority and overwhelming odds.

 

The Airfield Battalions (Hikojo Daitai) were not part of the air units, which each had their own repair & maintenance companies as well. They were deployed to look after airfields and the maintenance elements of them were usually trained to service a particular type of aircraft. They had four main duties:

 

1. To maintain & defend the airfield

2. To manage materiels - food, fuel, bombs, ammunition and equipment

3. To accomodate and provision flying personnel based on the airfield

4. To service and maintain - and partially repair - aircraft stationed at the airfield

 

Supplies of fuel, bombs and ammunition were held on the airfields and replenished from the Field Air Supply Depots (Yasen Koku Hokyusho) by the Battalion materiels squad (Zairyo han) aided by the motor transport sections. As detailed below it was feasible for an AB or part of an AB to be deployed to an airfield without aircraft!

 

If an air unit was using an airfield for any length of time it would very often transfer in its own ground echelon, by road transport or more usually air, depending on the operational circumstances. The maintenance elements of the AB would then assist the flying unit's ground personnel in their servicing routine.

 

The typical airfield servicing routine was as follows:

 

1. 10 and 30 hour inspections

2. Oil changes - every 25-30 hours

3. Plug changes - every 60-70 hours

4. Engine changes - after 250 hours

5. Instrument adjustments and other minor repairs and replacements

 

Damaged aircraft were inspected by a technical officer who decided whether they could be repaired at the airfield. Aircraft requiring major repair were sent back to a Field Air Repair Depot (Yasen Koku Shuriso) or one of its sub-depots. Very occasionally mobile air repair platoons (Koku Ido Shurihan) were sent from the Depots to effect repairs at the forward airfield.

 

In reality the AB's were often under strength and had to improvise. As an example a company of the 17 Hikojo Daitai deployed to Hmawbi, Burma in 1944 consisted of:

 

1. The Chutai Hombu (Company HQ)

2. A Shiki han (Administration section) under the command of a Warrant Officer with about 30 personnel

3. A Seibi shotai (Re-fueling and general maintenance section) commanded by a Lieutenant, with 4 NCO's and about 45 personnel. This section also maintained and repaired the runways, using local auxiliary labour

4. A Keibi shotai (Guarding section) also commanded by a Lieutenant with about 30 personnel, responsible for the stocks of fuel and ammunition

5. A Zairyo han (Materials section) commanded by a Lieutenant, with 2 NCO's and about 7 personnel who looked after the storage and issue of tools. At Hmawbi this lieutenant also doubled as the MT officer.

 

At the time there were no aircraft at Hmawbi and the company broke up and dispersed in the face of the Allied ground advance, resulting in the capture of some of its personnel.

 

Chokkyo Hikotai

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Sunday, 7 July 2002, at 1:32 p.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Pailuchi A/F 1943.12.15 (Franek Grabowski)

 

The independent flying squadrons (Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai) and direct co-operation units (Chokusetsu or Chokusai Kyodo Hikotai - Chokkyo Hikotai) were frequently split into small sub-units and deployed widely to support ground operations, usually flying Ki-51 and Ki-36 aircraft. They were not tied to specific areas or bases but their movements were subject to the demands of a particular campaign or operation.

 

It was not impossible for various aircraft from other units to be at a particular airfield, staging through or engaged in various support or administration flights (this was true of airfields the world over). The Ki-51 in particular was frequently used for support flights, picking up or delivering aircrew and essential spares components. It would not be unusual to catch one in the air or on the ground at an airfield predominantly used by other units. The work of the various transport units, communications and meteorological flights adds to the complexity and interest of this situation.

 

One example of this type of flight, although not in this theatre, was the loss of Captain Shimada Saburo, CO of the 73rd Independent Flying Chutai and Captain Oda Fukumichi, at Elpaputih Bay, Dutch New Guinea on 28th July 1944. Shimada was returning to Haroekoe from Samate in a Ki-51 after a mission to take spare parts to repair the aircraft of Sgt Yokogi Saneyoshi, damaged during a search for the missing Ki-51 of Lt Saruwata Akira. Saruwata had disappeared days earlier during a convoy escort mission between Manokwari to Sorong. Shimada was caught by Lightnings of the 475FG and downed after a heroic fight.

 

In September the 44th Sentai in China had been co-operating with ground forces at Hankow and Shanghai whilst the 90th was in Formosa. By January 1944 the 44th was at Tachengchen and the 90th at Tungshan and Canton. The 16th was at Anyang (aka Wuchang) and the 54th at Yangchow. These moves represent the nuclei of these units - elements from them were probably operating widely on detachment - on a day by day basis.

 

Re: Chokkyo Hikotai

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Thursday, 11 July 2002, at 4:09 p.m.

 

In Response To: Chokkyo Hikotai (Nick Millman)

 

Thanks for your extensive and exhaustive replies! It took me some time to get through them and of course few questions appeared.

Was the 44 Sentai an army cooperation unit and was it dispersed along the front? Same regarding 90 Sentai and also was the latter unit present in China in December 1943?

 

Re: Chokkyo Hikotai

 

Posted By: Nick Millman

Date: Sunday, 14 July 2002, at 5:50 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Chokkyo Hikotai (Franek Grabowski)

 

according to my sources the 44th Sentai was composed of 3 Chokkyo Hikotai flying Ki-36 Ida and Ki-51 Sonia aircraft. The tail marking was a small red hinomaru with the Hikotai distinguished by the corresponding number of white straight or curved stripes beneath it.

 

Some sources assert that the Ki-36 was not used after 1941 but I believe that is most unlikely and suggest that the Ki-36 and Ki-51 were in fact used throughout the war. The likelihood is that the Chutai and even Shotai would be detached to operate widely on ground support and co-operation sorties.

 

The 90th Sentai was a light bomber unit equipped with the Kawasaki Ki-48, Army Type 99, light bomber "Lily". The tail marking was a circle containing a stylised "9" - this marking being painted in the Chutai colour, white, red or yellow for 1st, 2nd and 3rd - with coloured stripes representing the different Shotai.

 

In August 1942 the 90th was engaged in night training in Peiping and Licheng (see my earlier posts). In 1943 it was split up - the main force forming the "Seto Unit" with one Chutai of the 33rd (Fighter) Sentai and a Chokkyo Hikotai to support the 23rd Army from Hai Kow Shi in the Luichow peninsula. From here it raided Kweilin and other locations in South-West China. The remaining element of the 90th stayed with the 1st Air Brigade at Hankow, together with the 23rd and 25th Sentai and elements of the 16th Sentai.

 

By September 1943 the 90th Sentai was reported to be at Kagi in Formosa, probably re-fitting, but as part of the 1st Air Brigade it was also likely to be sending detachments to airfields around Canton.

 

By January 1944 the 90th Sentai was reported to be using bases at Tungshan (Hankow) and Canton, engaged in predominantly night raiding of enemy airfields.

 

Re: Chokkyo Hikotai

 

Posted By: Franek Grabowski <frantag@friko4.onet.pl>

Date: Monday, 22 July 2002, at 8:01 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Chokkyo Hikotai (Nick Millman)

 

Just only one question, hopefully last one in this thread.

You refer to bases Anyang and Tungshan. Are they names of bases in respectively Wuchang and Hankow and usually refferred to the latter names or were they separate bases in the neighbourhood?