Re: "The Inchon Landing: An Example of Brilliant Generalship"

[Love Shack <Home@DanSources.com>]

Actually the Japanese had been for the last two years pulling their best pilots out
of the front line to bolster home land defense for a last stand.  They were
stationed in Northern parts of Japan and Korea.  They had a good enough force
remaining to give us a hard time.  Many were wounded and recovering. Some got back
in action against US Navy and Army. They flew the hopped up Zeros, Ki43, new Ki84,
George, Ki100 when they could get gas. Japan had stock piled a lot of weapons to
have a sustained war on the mainland.

It is intersting that in China they are still digging up old stores of weapons.  In
Mongolia is was old WW2 Japanese stockpile of weapons captured by the Russians
given to Maos forces that defeated Gen Chiang kai Chek.

Admittedly they would not have lasted long as the US was finally getting our new
high performance interceptor, air superiority aircaft in to the battle zone that
was equal or better then the new Japanese
fighter planes.  Bearcat, Tigercat, H-Mustang, U4 series Corsair and even the P80
Shooting Star were all being moved up.

Dan


robert guertin wrote:

> By the end of WW2, the Japanese were bereft of Aces.......their airforce having
> been reduced primarily to Kamakazi Pilots with less than 10 hrs flight
> instruction, since they were not expected to execute safe landings.
>
> Love Shack wrote:
>
> > My take on this is that the Navy would have forced the NK and Chinese to use
> > the rest of their Air Power.
> > Since the ground war would require Navy, Marine and AirForce support at a
> > lower rate it would mitigate some of the Mig 15's performance.  The Navy's
> > 4-20mm in the F9F would certainly do more damage in a Snap Shot then the 50
> > cal of the Saber.
> >
> > This would have forced the NK, Chinese and Russians to expend too many
> > resources,
> > eventually depleted their ranks.
> >
> > Also I do not know if the USA would have employeed the Japanese Army and
> > Pilots to assist in the war.
> > I believe there was discussion in an earlier post about the potential
> > Japanese military support as they did
> > have many skilled Aces after WW2.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jack Hwang" <jackchwang@comcast.net>
> > To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 10:57 PM
> > Subject: RE: "The Inchon Landing: An Example of Brilliant Generalship"
> >
> > > > Why did not the UN perform another end round operation after the Chinese
> > > entered the war?
> > > > Or was there suxh a plan if the war had continued.?
> > > > This is woulda shoulda coulda question.
> > > > Dan
> > >
> > > That might not be a good option after Chinese entered the war.  Another
> > > landing like Inchon was always a big concern for Communists after 1951.
> > > CPVA and NKPA both assigned a lot of dedicated troops to guard the
> > > coast lines.  In September 1951, CPVA alone had 4 armies (which were
> > > actually corps) at the west coast and 2 and half armies at the east coast
> > > of Korea peninsula solely for this duty.
> > >
> > > >From December 1952 to April 1953, in response to the UN's preparation
> > > for a possible landing, Communists increased the strength of the coast
> > > defense.  There were at least 6 CPVA armies, 2 NKPA armies, and 16
> > > tank regiments deployed along the west coast, and another 2 CPVA
> > > armies, 2 NKPA armies and 1 tank regiment along the east coast.
> > >
> > > So it was not likely for UN to achieve another big success as in Inchon.
> > >
> > > Jack
> > >
> > >