Clash of Wings (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Scott_USN -> Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 9:55:42 AM)

I seen the best ever documentary on the Air War in the Pacific today. It was all original film and gun footage except for a few animated maps. Great narration and footage even color footage. B-25s at wave top blasting away with the .50 cals to exploding gun camera footage.

No experts with their annoying opinions just an hour of Pacific War.

Clash of Wings: Battle of Bismark Sea.

Although it covered the entire war from Bismark to the end including all the planes and some tactics. Was really good and will get your WiTP motivation going. :)

All I could think of at the end was "WTF was the Japanese thinking?"

Its a series on the Military Channel if you get a chance to catch it is well worth watching. There are several others that I hope to catch also.

Oh and not sure if this was the right place to post this.. :)

http://military.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=52.6054.86426.17361.x


Clash of Wings
Return to the Pacific
TV-PG, CC

U.S. aircraft out-muscled Japanese fighters during the Battle of the Bismark Sea. The gull-winged Corsair was referred to by the Japanese as the whispering death.



m10bob -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 11:39:16 AM)

Just when you think you have studied it all...
Just yesterday I read the part of Bergerud' FIRE IN THE SKY dealing with the 5th AF and the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, and I learned skip-bombing by the Allies not only was truly born there, but was an on-going,consistent tactic from then on against Japanese shipping.
Seems the Brits had been doing it prior to Pearl Harbor, and it was a natural thing for the Aussies and Americans to expound on it.
Pappy Gunn and Gen Kenney went for it in a big way and removed the bombardier from the B 25, replacing that whole compartment with big .50 cal MG's,(14 to a B 25!).
When employed against shipping the effect was devastating.
Since it was a standard tactic, too bad it cannot be employed that often in game without taking horrendous morale hits, and the ever present chant of "unfairness" by the human opponent.[;)]
BTW, Bergerud's book gives the Beaufighter the title of "most-feared anti-shipping strafer".



saj42 -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 2:44:18 PM)

Beaufighter is under-rated by the game - morale hit for low level attacks and no rockets [:(]



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 4:14:27 PM)

And it was the Beaufighter, NOT the Corsair, that the Japs called the "Whispering Death".

The F4U was called the "Whistling Death". I've seen this mistake made too many times now...[:@]

And neither name can be conclusively linked to the Japanese; they're both suspected to have been invented by Allied propaganda.



Charbroiled -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 4:38:16 PM)

What???? Allied media inventing and sensationalizing the news???? I'm shocked!![X(]



ny59giants -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 5:51:35 PM)

quote:

media inventing and sensationalizing the news????


I thought THIS was their purpose. [sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000289.gif]



Charbroiled -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 6:07:40 PM)

Some years ago, someone showed me an article of what a news report of the Battle at Midway might look like if it was written by todays media. It made it sound like the US got it's tail kicked, while still being factually correct. I wish I had kept a copy.



String -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 6:13:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And it was the Beaufighter, NOT the Corsair, that the Japs called the "Whispering Death".

The F4U was called the "Whistling Death". I've seen this mistake made too many times now...[:@]

And neither name can be conclusively linked to the Japanese; they're both suspected to have been invented by Allied propaganda.



And in truth it was most likely the allied press who called the Beaufighter whispering death. There are no records of the japanese doing it.



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 6:27:21 PM)

I could have sworn that was what I just said...[8|]



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 6:30:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

Some years ago, someone showed me an article of what a news report of the Battle at Midway might look like if it was written by todays media. It made it sound like the US got it's tail kicked, while still being factually correct. I wish I had kept a copy.


Been posted two or three times on the forum... Not funny.



panda124c -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 8:18:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: String

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And it was the Beaufighter, NOT the Corsair, that the Japs called the "Whispering Death".

The F4U was called the "Whistling Death". I've seen this mistake made too many times now...[:@]

And neither name can be conclusively linked to the Japanese; they're both suspected to have been invented by Allied propaganda.



And in truth it was most likely the allied press who called the Beaufighter whispering death. There are no records of the japanese doing it.


I came across this name reading about the North African Campaign, where the Beaufighter were employed at 50' (feet) for strafing missions, it is suppose to be attributed to the design (accidental) of the engine exhaust, the engine exhaust sound is blocked by the cowling so you don't hear the engine until after the A/C has passed over you.

The nick name for the Corsair is suppose to come from the sound made in a dive because of the bent wing shape.

Who knows, find me a Beaufighter and a Corsair to fly and I'll be happy to test it out. [:D]



Scott_USN -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/11/2007 9:22:01 PM)

It seems you are correct about "Whistling Death" they most likely got it confused. According to the show the Japanese fighter pilots named the F4U the best fighter they had to face. Either way the F4U was a hell of a plane. The F4U didn't need much propaganda.

Anyway good show worth it just for the camera footage.



RUPD3658 -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/12/2007 4:29:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

Some years ago, someone showed me an article of what a news report of the Battle at Midway might look like if it was written by todays media. It made it sound like the US got it's tail kicked, while still being factually correct. I wish I had kept a copy.


I think this is what you were referring to:

Midway Island Demolished. Yorktown, destroyer sunk.
Many US planes lost
June 7, 1942
The United States Navy suffered another blow in its attempt to stem the Japanese juggernaut ravaging the Pacific Ocean. Midway Island, perhaps the most vital U.S. outpost, was pummeled by Japanese Naval aviators. The defending U.S. forces, consisting primarily of antique Buffalo fighters, were competely wiped out while the Japanese attackers suffered few, if any, losses.
In a nearby naval confrontation, the Japanese successfully attacked the Yorktown which was later sunk by a Japanese submarine. A destroyer lashed to the Yorktown was also sunk.

American forces claim to have sunk four Japanese carriers and the cruiser Mogami but those claims were vehemently denied by the Emporer's spokeman.

The American carriers lost an entire squadron of torpedo planes when they failed to link up with fighter escorts. The dive bombers had fighter escort even though they weren't engaged by enemy fighters. The War Dept. refused to answer when asked why the fighters were assigned to the wrong attack groups. The Hornet lost a large number of planes when they couldn't locate the enemy task force. Despite this cavalcade of errors, Admirals Fletcher and Spruance have not been removed.

Code Broken
The failure at Midway is even more disheartening because the U.S. Navy knew the Japanese were coming. Secret documents provided to the NY Times showed that "Magic" intercepts showed the Japanese planned to attack Midway, which they called "AF".

Obsolete Equipment
Some critics blamed the failure at Midway on the use of obsolete aircraft. The inappropriately named Devastator torpedo planes proved no match for the Japanese fighters. Even the Avengers, its schedule replacements, were riddled with bullets and rendered unflyable. Secretary of War Stimson dodged the question saying simply: "You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have". Critics immediately called for his resignation.




m10bob -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/12/2007 6:22:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RUPD3658


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

Some years ago, someone showed me an article of what a news report of the Battle at Midway might look like if it was written by todays media. It made it sound like the US got it's tail kicked, while still being factually correct. I wish I had kept a copy.


I think this is what you were referring to:

Midway Island Demolished. Yorktown, destroyer sunk.
Many US planes lost
June 7, 1942
The United States Navy suffered another blow in its attempt to stem the Japanese juggernaut ravaging the Pacific Ocean. Midway Island, perhaps the most vital U.S. outpost, was pummeled by Japanese Naval aviators. The defending U.S. forces, consisting primarily of antique Buffalo fighters, were competely wiped out while the Japanese attackers suffered few, if any, losses.
In a nearby naval confrontation, the Japanese successfully attacked the Yorktown which was later sunk by a Japanese submarine. A destroyer lashed to the Yorktown was also sunk.

American forces claim to have sunk four Japanese carriers and the cruiser Mogami but those claims were vehemently denied by the Emporer's spokeman.

The American carriers lost an entire squadron of torpedo planes when they failed to link up with fighter escorts. The dive bombers had fighter escort even though they weren't engaged by enemy fighters. The War Dept. refused to answer when asked why the fighters were assigned to the wrong attack groups. The Hornet lost a large number of planes when they couldn't locate the enemy task force. Despite this cavalcade of errors, Admirals Fletcher and Spruance have not been removed.

Code Broken
The failure at Midway is even more disheartening because the U.S. Navy knew the Japanese were coming. Secret documents provided to the NY Times showed that "Magic" intercepts showed the Japanese planned to attack Midway, which they called "AF".

Obsolete Equipment
Some critics blamed the failure at Midway on the use of obsolete aircraft. The inappropriately named Devastator torpedo planes proved no match for the Japanese fighters. Even the Avengers, its schedule replacements, were riddled with bullets and rendered unflyable. Secretary of War Stimson dodged the question saying simply: "You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have". Critics immediately called for his resignation.





Thank you....How true, point taken...................

I have a theory on how to win wars quickly.
Each day the war continues, kill one journalist covering the war.

Lemme see..what was it Sherman said about the press???



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/12/2007 11:46:40 AM)

Like I said, not funny... Or even interesting...



dwwindsor -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 3:04:03 AM)

Absolute hogwash. While we merrily execute journalists engaged in the exercise of their constituitional rights shall we also abolish the right of those to speak with whom we disagree?

"I have a theory on how to win wars quickly.
Each day the war continues, kill one journalist covering the war."

What a truly reprehensible and thoroughly unamerican atitude.



ChezDaJez -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 3:17:52 AM)

quote:

Like I said, not funny... Or even interesting...


Unfortunately, very true though.

Chez



ChezDaJez -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 3:46:44 AM)

quote:

Absolute hogwash.


Is it? When was the last time you saw a news story emphasizing the positive that is happening in Iraq?

Journalists report the tragedies of war because that's what their editors want. The good news gets buried if reported at all. After all, good stories don't sell papers.

It upsets me that the majority of stories are centered around combat casualties. The headlines scream "US serviceman killed in firefight in IRAQ!" Every soldier's death is reported as though it were a defeat for our forces. "3000+ dead, when will it end?"

What you don't hear about is the story leading to his death. You don't hear that this soldier's outfit was engaged in humanitarian aid that insurgements didn't want delivered. Or that the soldiers were conducting a sweep after a car bombing in a civilian marketplace. Or that the operation they were engaged in was a success.

That's not to say the reports of combat casualties should be minimalized. They shouldn't. But let's have the full picture. The government isn't the only organization that slants the truth to fit their needs.

Chez



Scott_USN -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 5:10:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dwwindsor

Absolute hogwash. While we merrily execute journalists engaged in the exercise of their constituitional rights shall we also abolish the right of those to speak with whom we disagree?

"I have a theory on how to win wars quickly.
Each day the war continues, kill one journalist covering the war."

What a truly reprehensible and thoroughly unamerican atitude.


Unamerican? Most of these so-called Journalist with an agenda today would have been in jail for the duration of the war in WWII America. It was not allowed and FDR had sweeping powers to make it so.

You can't win a war with a 5th column of massive media picking at everything the military needs to do to win. The media has no right to cause harm with the right to free press comes a huge responsibility.

Most of the newspapers in WWII self censored they felt it was their duty and for the good of the war effort. However if they didn't the government would have. Some were jailed.

Although I agree that killing them is not the answer some of the garbage you see in the media today is nothing short of enemy propaganda.



m10bob -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 7:10:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dwwindsor

Absolute hogwash. While we merrily execute journalists engaged in the exercise of their constituitional rights shall we also abolish the right of those to speak with whom we disagree?

"I have a theory on how to win wars quickly.
Each day the war continues, kill one journalist covering the war."

What a truly reprehensible and thoroughly unamerican atitude.



You mis-spelled Constitution, and American is capitalized.................
I took an oath to defend both.



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 12:43:53 PM)

And this is why this piece of offal shouldn't have been posted again. Want to take a guess as to whether or not the same thing happened last time?[8|]



dwwindsor -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 1:59:50 PM)

Some of us are clearly not reading the same papers.

"You mis-spelled Constitution" Yes.

"and American is capitalized................." Not necessarily.

"I took an oath to defend both" So did I.



RUPD3658 -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/13/2007 9:12:30 PM)

Before his thread gets locked:

The episode of Clash of Wings that Scott_USN mentioned will be on the Military Channel at 2am Eastern time this Tuesday.

Let's just watch the show and keep politics out of it.

[sm=00000924.gif]



panda124c -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/14/2007 8:29:28 PM)

Thanks, I'll try to catch it.

Sorry I can't resist: There is an old saying:

"No news is good news"

But you always have to consider that no news doesn't sell newspapers (or other media). So logic dictates that Good news is no news and therefore not worth printing.


Again thanks RUPD3658 for the heads up on the Military Channel show.



Charbroiled -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/14/2007 9:30:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And this is why this piece of offal shouldn't have been posted again. Want to take a guess as to whether or not the same thing happened last time?[8|]


Terminus, sorry for bringing it up. Didn't know about the firestorm this created before. Won't mention it again.

However, not discussing things just because a topic could be sensitive to some people is not a good approach IMHO. Maybe this might not be the "proper" place to discuss the subject of media reporting on the war, but I do value EVERYBODY's opinion on THIS board, even if I don't agree with it. Believe it or not, the media runs this planet, not the politicians.

TO Scott_USN: Sorry for the unintentional hi-jack of your thread. I guess I'm use to seeing others do it so often and seem to forget that some may see it as being rude.[&o]



Terminus -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/14/2007 9:51:38 PM)

That's not the point. The point is that politics, like religion, are big no-no's around here, because of the huge potential for badness they have. No other subjects spawn such huge flamefights.

There used to be a politics forum around here, but it was spun off because it was bad for the place.



MineSweeper -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/14/2007 9:56:56 PM)

If you want to spend some time on these issues try this forum.....lot of intresting subjects.......[:)]

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/



Feinder -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/15/2007 12:32:34 AM)

I thought this thread sounded familiar.

"Clash of Wings" is a book written by Col. Walter Boyne.  It's basically a over-view of the air war in WW2 (Euopean and Asian).  I own, read a while ago. It covers so much that it's relagated to basically a watered-down summary of -everything- (instead of focusing on thing and being authoritative).  Still.  It's a "fair" read (I'd give it a C, and I hate to sound like a history snob).  But I wonder if the series comes from the book.  Anybody see Col. Boyne in any of the credits?

-F-



Scott_USN -> RE: Clash of Wings (5/15/2007 6:51:26 AM)

The show is broad Feinder but really close detail was not what made it interesting to me. I have read or watched the different battles and such which go into great detail. The film footage was the best part of the show in my opinion and planes of course.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.703125