US Airstrikes in support of 36 Div, North Burma 1945 - aircraft & payloads?

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by PackRat, Mar 30, 2018.

  1. PackRat

    PackRat Well-Known Member

    These two airstrike requests come from the January 1945 war diary of 130 Fd. Regt, fighting with 29 Brigade, 36 Division near Twinnge in Northern Burma with US air support (10 USAAF Air Support Control Unit is mentioned on one of the message forms). They mention four different types of munitions between them: HE, blast, fire and land mines. Does anyone have more information on these payloads, and the type of aircraft that would have delivered them?

    NCACAir1.jpg NCACAir2.jpg
     
    CL1 likes this.
  2. sol

    sol Very Senior Member

    If 10th USAAF provided support than those air-strikes were probably carried by P-47 Thunderbolt, P-51 Mustang or/and B-25 Mitchell. I doubt they used B-24 unless there is a heavy bunkered positions that needs to be blasted.
     
    CL1 and PackRat like this.
  3. CL1

    CL1 116th LAA and 92nd (Loyals) LAA,Royal Artillery

  4. PackRat

    PackRat Well-Known Member

    Thanks Sol, the P47 Thunderbolts are a possibility as they are mentioned in 494 Battery's diary when two of them accidentally strafed a party of Indian engineers on the railway line at Mawlu on Nov 6 1944. That's the only mention of plane types I can find in any of the diaries, though. These requests were sent during the advance on Twinnge, east of Mongmit, which seems to have had a good number of bunkers and trench systems.

    Is there any reference material available on the ordnance used here? This is the first time I've seen mention of land mines dropped by planes in WW2 (guessing these were not in the same category as the Luftwaffe's 'parachute mines'). Were 'fire bombs' an early use of napalm? And were the 'blast' some type of anti-personnel?
     
    CL1 likes this.
  5. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    As to the payloads available to the USAAF, see this page: Aerial Bombs
    The site concentrates on the 8th Air Force but includes a chart of all available ordnance. I don't see napalm on there unless it's hiding under another label. The blast or HE might have been any of the general purpose bombs from 50 lb up to 1000 lb. The USAAF had an incendiary weighing 4lb and the 100lb general purpose bomb could also be filled with white phosphorous for the incendiary role. I don't know that your source means by "mines."
     
    PackRat and CL1 like this.
  6. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    I did some more checking. The napalm bomb was the AN-M76, which weighed 500 pounds and does not appear on the chart. It was first used in action in the second half of 1944.
     
    CL1 likes this.
  7. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    Jap bunkers were notoriously difficult to crack. You could snipe at the embrasures with HV weapons like the 2 pdr and 6 pdr (both were used for that purpose) but the RA found in the Arakan that the 25 pdr couldn't penetrate the roofs or walls of Jap bunkers consistently so medium pieces like the 5.5" gun and the old 6" how were recommended. I haven't studied up on the use of aerial ordnance against Jap bunkers but if it was me I wouldn't have used HE or blast of less than 1,000 pounds weight. It looks as if 10th AF was using a mixture--HE/blast to crack if not penetrate the walls and ceilings, then incendiary to get into the cracks and embrasures and burn the Japs out. It sounds like a good method.
     
  8. PackRat

    PackRat Well-Known Member

    The 'mines' one is the real puzzle, I can't find anything on the internet about a delivery system for dropping them by plane in WW2.

    I think the 'fire bombs' may well have been napalm then, as your link says that it became available in the latter half of 1944 and they were "known as Class-C Fire Bombs". The link also says that "Originally, the only incendiary bombs available were the British 250lb and 500lb models filled with a rubber/gasoline mix", which is interesting as there's a reference in the diary to an unsuccessful experiment with 'oil bombs' to burn away the jungle and reveal bunkers in the Arakan on 11 March 1943:

    1255 3 Bisley [Blenheim] bombers escorted by fighters endeavoured unsuccessfully to set alight the jungle SOUTH S.W. of TWIN KNOBS with oil bombs and incendiaries. Small fires burned until 1630 hrs but the net effect was negligible. Later in the day 6 bombers attacked DONBAIK and the nala area to the east.
     
  9. ceolredmonger

    ceolredmonger Member

    just a guess if we assume inaccurate terminology is being used - 'fire bombs' may be napalm or WP however I would expect the latter to be 'smoke'.
    The term 'land mine' was used during the blitz to refer to German heavy explosive bombs who's effect was based on damaging structures by ground effect or cratering rather than traditional above ground HE blast or fragmentation (I assume the name comes from comparison to 1st WW mines). I would guess a soldier in Burma could refer to the the 1000lb bomb in this respect.
     
    PackRat likes this.
  10. PackRat

    PackRat Well-Known Member

    That does sound likely. The targets were bunker and trench systems, potentially with deep dugouts below, so scattering land-mines (in the 'modern' use of the word) did seem strange, especially in a mixed load with napalm which surely wouldn't do them much good!
     
    ceolredmonger likes this.

Share This Page