wwii japanese air force

8/9/2019 WWII Japanese Air Force

1/6

ByTHE COMMANDING GENERAL

Army Air F o r ~ e s ,. :'.1'7g ~ / # / , f C 'DATE INITIALS

CGt:TEr:'I'S

3 a -SstLaate of ..:0 :It.11y JI::'rcraft [roduction

2 0 Tables and Charts1 0 S t r e ~ 6 t h ~ l D ~ s r o s i t i o n 110 Losses anrl , 'astafe

L ~ 5 t i : : 1 U . t c of Jc:.pC'J1cse Ai::- Force

1 0 CQf,..nanding General, i ~ r . ( l Air Forces2 0 C . l i . : ~ f of Air Staf f30 AC/....s, I'leins (2)40 ACjAS, Inte l l i [ence50 Chief, OfD, 1;DGS6" Deputy Chief, (Air) , J'hcatre7" De.Juty Chie " . Ii Ug. Joint In te l . ~ ~ a f f 90 '.hi)+,e House fricer.

10" AFSAT

I

FOR THE M 0 NTH END I NG: 29 Febrvary 19M- - - - - -


2/6

/

ESTI MATE 1 OF J PANESE AIR FORCE..IDENTIFIEDRECENT OPERATIONS COMBAT STilENG1H DISPOSIT ION1. In the South and Southwest Pacific, ,the MONTHLY'enemr has withdrawn hi s ai r defense of the,Bis %OF ARE"marcks, as he had done previouslr in the Solo AREA STRENGTWTOTAL-CHANGEmons, and res tric ted hi s operations to a stat ic JAPAN,KUR.ILES,MANCHURlA 1944 41% +7%mall scale defense of New Guinea, development SE ICI!A& Eof a i r fac i l i t i e s in rear areas , and sporadic 1996 COMBAT\UNA AOJACENT AREAS 765 16% +20%night attacks against Allied forward and rear STItENGTIGHTERS

132680M8E

1397FIGHTER.S

CAPABILITIES OF THE J .A.F.:BURMA,SlAM,MALAVA. SUMATRA 538 IZ% - 1 2 ~bases on New Guinea.'1. The J.A.F. has los t the capabil i t r forlarge-scale, sustained offensive action. '5 &SW PACAFIC, JAVA 773 1 6 ~ 0 - 2 . "2 The J.A.F. offered no ai r defense overthe Marshalls and eas t e r n Carol ines, and a CENTRAL PACAFIC 687 15 8%strong, though ineffective ai r ~ e f e n s e over Truk, 2,. The J.A.F. because' of quali ta t ive andTinian, and S a ~ p a n . TOTALS - 472.7 % quantitative inferiority, is unable adequatelrto defend the Empire on it s present perimeter.MONTHLY CHANGE IN TOTAL COMBAT RENGTH+91 3. J.A.F. offensive operations in Burmawere negligible in scale and ineffective , while' 169 3. The J .A.F. ' has the capabi l i ty fo rit s defensive operations decreased over Burma strong defensive action against invading ai r and80MBERSnd Thailand, bu t increased in China over the amphibious forces , if withdrawn to interiorYangtze river v a ~ l e y . Enemy attacks against our l ines , which provide defensive fac i l i t i e s inforward ai r bases in China, continued on a re depth and breadth.'duced scale. '1. The J.A.F. retains the capability for:SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN STRENGTH AND D I s P O S I T ~ O N +SI ~ L O A ~ S 'A. Strong, land based torpedo and dive1. Estimated identified strength of combat bomber attacks against amphibious~ 8 ' O T H E I l C inits increased by ~ . percent during the month, operat ions, except in the Bisalthough it is believed that over-al l ai rcraf t marcks and Solomons area. However,, s t r e n g t ~ showed re la t ively l i t t l e change. TOTAL4727 111ied local ai r super ior i t r hasdiscouraged such attacks altogether,2,. Identified s trength in the southwest or reduced them to negligible scalePacific , principallr in New Britain, New Ireland, and ineffective results .PROBABLE INTENTIONS OF THE J .A.F.:and Java, declined by. 24 percent during themon th.' 'The Burma-Siam-Malara-Sumatr a area de b. Offensive action in Burma, China

c r ~ a s e d br 12 percent. However, st renth in 1.' The enemy irrevocably cOlllli t ted t'o 4.' In general, committ .ents wil l be made and New GUinea, conditioned as to.the s t r a te . io ensl ve . , on the per imeter defenses only to the ex en tcreased br 78 percen t in the Central Paci f ic, scale and duration by reqUirementsthat, over-&l1 attri t ion does no t ser iousl , exand by 20 percent in China and adjacent areas. ' and losses on other fronts. '.' T e e ., w111 conserve hi s ai r strength ceed production, and in individual insta ces/ for the nse ot the inner zone on l ines that such as recently at Rabaul, to the extent re WASTAGE , c. Effective long-range night bombingffer most favorable defensive conditions qUired to delay an Allied advance until ade uateaga ai r attack8, or combined ai r and naval defenses can be buil t in the rear.' attacks upon Our bases in the Marshalls .. J.A.F.' February wastage, or 100 percent e n agAinst . . ,hlbloua attacks.of enemr ai rcraf t claimed destroyed plus per ~ The enemy will continue his effort tocent of average monthly operational strength, is 3. There ar e indications that following secure maximum aircraft production with f i r s testimated at 9 ~ ai rcraf t . If non-eombat attri- the abandonment of the ai r detense of Rabaul the ;priority on fighters, dive and torpedo boab rs. 'tion is estiaated at 8 percent instead ot G per enemy has deteralned to withdraw temporarilycent of average,monthlr operational strength, from combat to the ! extent possible onwhich may eventuallr prove to be a'more accurate' ,al l fronts, in order to bUild up hi s ai r strengthf igure, Februarr wastage would amount to 1102 against our next Jor otfensive moves, and forai rcraf t . th& ultimate defeDie'Of the ,Empire.'


3/6

TABLE; ISTRENGTH ANi: DISPO:3JTION OF JliPANi::SE AIR FORGE liS OF ). MARCH 1944

B O M B E R ~ FIGHTERS FlIJAT PLANES TOTA. ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Japan) Yarcus & Bonins 680 (-13) 180 (.,";16) 1612

K u r i l e s ~ Hokkaido:; Karafuto 67 (?67) 63 (27) 2 (o ) o (=4) 1321f.anchuriaj) Kore&., No China 78 (-rr27) 152 (0) 8 (0 ) 43 (0 ) 281Central and .'30 China. Hainan"Formosa and No I n d o ~ C h i n a 276 (4-78; 305 (=11) 54 (.,.-15)

U ~ l a y a ) Sumutra, Andamans 1$3 C ~ 2 ) 60 ( ~ . 3 6 ) 302 J a v a ~ :'i:llor Innt!r Seas, Pelc 84


4/6

".., .

."""' ......

-' ..'WI'"

........

.i P

CENTRAL PACIFIC". ' 01 roA J4QO,\;

.' . ~

&,C LI

...

.0.

r ,,' -

'-)\I

I

y , ~ . ~ 1 I MA2CH 4J . A . ~ IDENTIFIED COMBAT STRENGTH

F'GHTE2S '996&OM6E2S 1895OTHE2S TOTAL 4.727

J,___ J,,J- -,"

,,(-,,-

AT ru.. '':'


5/6

TriBLE II

:P.tf..BRlL;RY 1944ProbablyType Alc Destroyed U e 5 ~ r o y e d Damar;edFighters 262 95 66Bonbers 86 2 6Unidentified';;' and others 384 109. 118732 ; ~ 0 6 190-* friwarily fighters and bomhersoOf the above aircraft reported destroyed in air combat or on the grolmd,a total of 407 were destroyed in the South and Southwest Pacific, 291 in theCentral Pacific, and 34 in the Asiatic Theater. Not included under ffDestroyed l1above is l i pick up of 94 unidentified aircraft , mainly fighters and bombers, con-firmed additionally destroyed in January and b r i n g i n ~ the number of enemy air-craft dest.royed in January up from 765 to 859 r.

~ ~ a s t a g e of the JoAoF. during February, or 100% of enemy aircraft ;claimeddestroyed in combat o p ~ r a t i o n s , plus non-combat losses of 5% of averaGe monthlyoperational strength, is estimated to have totalled 953 combat aircraft. Ifn o n ~ c o m b a t attri t ion is estirrated at ~ instead of 5% of average monthly oper-ational strength, \vhich may eventually prove to be a more accurate figul"e,total February w a s t ~ g e ~ o u l d amount to 1102 combat aircraft o


6/6

"

N'17' ( ~ " F H J 1IC1 )j l i l ] I ~ [ ! ~ I N ! ~ I ~ ! ~ ~ i l i l i i l fI

wwii japanese air force

Documents