Kamikaze/Tokkotai concepts

[Librarian]

A weapon of war I always tiptoe around but I've occasionally thought about further concepts for this dramatic form of air to ground/sea missile. Various western nations toyed with the idea of piggyback twin aircraft, weaponising the 'father' into a flying bomb. If the Japanese had followed the German JU88 with a large warhead pairing, would they have bothered with the 'son' riding on the back? Would a rudimentary cockpit have been placed behind the warhead for a more effective way of not paying off your student loans?

There are several aircraft that could be 'Mistel-ed', but I would tend towards the faster and more manoeuvrable aircraft such as the Ginga.

Anyone toyed with these concepts before?

Would make a dynamite GB too

[NARSES2]

I always think of Mistel's being intended for large, important fixed targets like bridges, but I think some were used against the D-Day invasion fleet ?

So if the Japanese had toyed with the idea I suppose they could have been used specifically against carriers. tactically you could attempt to swamp the defences with a host of smaller Kamikaze whilst the Mistel comes along slightly latter in the heat of the battle ? However I just feel that they settled for the "swamp the target" rather than "the considered attack on a specific target" approach which is perhaps what the Mistel attack is ?

[Dizzyfugu]

AFAIK, the Mistel concept of tow aircraft was never considered - I know that bomber types were converted into huge - but manned - flying bombs, including a Ki-67 with a massive hollow/shaped charge in the nose against bunkers and huge fortifications. Any way, you'd use this concept IMHO only against immobile and huge targets (bunkers, dams, production sites), it's rather unsuited against landing fleets or other dispersed targets. Even a carrier - mobile and protected by AA gunfire - would be a hazardous target.

[tahsin]

Am pretty sure the Ki-67 weapon was tested against a static Japanese light tank, which supposedly was totally destroyed and Air International of early 1980s clearly indicate it was supposed to be used against ships
, carriers and the like. Unless new info along the decades that have passed since. Japanese planning did not even aim to sink them, just neutralize for the duration so that their battleship fleet could come to grips.

[Old Wombat]

The insanity of the Mistel type weapon systems is that they were designed for an offensive role against a static defence at a time when Germany was fighting a mobile defensive action against the Soviets in the East & against US/Commonwealth forces in Italy, & preparing to defend against an invasion in France (with "massive" defensive structures).

The kamikaze bombers may have had little chance of success in crippling a carrier, but there was a chance & it was a useful chance in both offensive & defensive roles. Japan's biggest problem was that it was running out of skilled, well-trained pilots as the war drew on & kamikaze attacks which had been more successful earlier, in part because of surprise & in part because the pilots were better trained & combat experienced, became less & less successful as AA defences multiplied & pilot skills dropped.

Mistels may have been useful against the British if Operation Sealion had gone ahead in 1941/early-1942.

Kamikazes may have been useful in the Coral Sea or at Midway in 1942.

By the time either was developed as a weapon/tactic it was too late.

[Librarian]

I think the way my thoughts were heading was that Japan had a resource the western powers shied away from...that of willing pilots to fly an aircraft into a target. The Mistel was handicapped by the 'son' pilot having to loosely aim a bomber at a target, disengage then with luck the bomber would fly true to its target. If the Mistel itself was actively flown by the pilot then accuracy would be far better.

Hajo Herrmann proposed high-chance-of-suicide ramming attacks on bombers or other targets and even the madder than hatter Nazi hierarchy baulked at the idea. There were some volunteers however.

[NARSES2]

If the Mistel itself was actively flown by the pilot then accuracy would be far better.

But then that's not a Mistel ? I'm obviously missing something as I can't see the point of a Mistel combination with the traditional smaller aircraft riding piggy back when the lower component is also piloted ?

[Librarian]

Took the wind out of my sails there...he's right!!?? But then I got back on track. A medium bomber...twin-engine...with a massive warhead strapped on the front where the cockpit should be, a rudimentary control pit placed behind the warhead, raised so as to see past the bulge. Now whack that into a carrier and an armoured deck would lose its advantage  .

To sum up...have the positives of a huge shaped-charge etc warhead, an actively flown/steered aircraft and a pilot willing to do the dirty, without the extra weight of the 'sohn' and lack of terminal steering. Think of all the wasted time and effort etc of the opposite-mistel that was the G4M/Ohka combination.

[sandiego89]

It could still be a Mistel, with the launcher aircraft having a pilot skilled in navigation, take off and landing- and the attack half with a minimally trained pilot that only needs enough skills for release and terminal dive.

Touchy subject indeed. 

[Librarian]

It could still be a Mistel, with the launcher aircraft having a pilot skilled in navigation, take off and landing- and the attack half with a minimally trained pilot that only needs enough skills for release and terminal dive.

Touchy subject indeed.

Now that makes sense...the Sohn used to keep off the CAP fighters too.

[jcf]

No need to penetrate the deck to take out an armoured deck aircraft carrier.

[zenrat]

It could still be a Mistel, with the launcher aircraft having a pilot skilled in navigation, take off and landing- and the attack half with a minimally trained pilot that only needs enough skills for release and terminal dive.

Touchy subject indeed.

Now that makes sense...the Sohn used to keep off the CAP fighters too.

Or, if the pilot of the exploding part was less than enthusiastic about dying for the emperor then maybe control was only released to him when the target was in sight and his "supervisor" had disconnected (dumping most of the bottom half's remaining fuel in the process to prevent any ideas about flying home).

[jcf]

It could still be a Mistel, with the launcher aircraft having a pilot skilled in navigation, take off and landing- and the attack half with a minimally trained pilot that only needs enough skills for release and terminal dive.

Touchy subject indeed.

Now that makes sense...the Sohn used to keep off the CAP fighters too.

Or, if the pilot of the exploding part was less than enthusiastic about dying for the emperor then maybe control was only released to him when the target was in sight and his "supervisor" had disconnected (dumping most of the bottom half's remaining fuel in the process to prevent any ideas about flying home).

Indeed, as the subject of the tokkotai pilots is not as cut and dried as some believe, and many
were 'volunteered' with no personal input.

[Librarian]

Some very interesting Japanese personal histories about that subject.

As Spike once put it "The POW camp was full of British officers who'd sworn to die rather than be captured".

Anyway, not a subject I really want to pursue anymore. Just very uncomfortable about it. I've got two (190% complete) JU88 kits and there's plenty of scope for these within other Japanese concepts banging about the braincase.

[NARSES2]

Yup dad came under Kamikaze attack a couple of times on Indefatigable, indeed she was hit by one in the famous "sweepers man your brooms" incident. He was an AAA gunner so had a birds eye view. Very rarely spoke about it, had to be maudlin drunk, and when he did talk he had a strange, very mixed opinion of the system and the pilots who flew in it. Had a couple of quite dark conversations with him.