Kamakazes

Sir

Banned
Kamikazes

What is the earliest possible date that the Japanese could start using kamikazes as a formal tactic? Is there anything to be gained by an earlier introduction?

Alternatively, what if no kamikaze attacks were used during WWII?

Final challenge: get another nation to adapt kamikaze-like tactics into its doctrine during WWII.
 
Last edited:

Sumeragi

Banned
1. It's Kamikaze

2. I think the OTL is the earliest time short of a Soviet invasion of Manchuria.

3. Nothing to be gained when done on ground. As for sea, it might be slightly more effective, since the cost-kill ratio is a bit big (3 planes for taking out a ship? Pretty cheap).

4. No changes whether or not the tactic is used.
 
You can have kamikazes as early as handheld explosives (i.e dynamite). A man running with a handful of lit dynamite might not be sophisticated but it is kamikaze all the same.
Any society can have their own equivalent of kamikaze. You just need a strong belief in the afterlife.
 
Regarding the OP's last point, I believe Germany OTL toyed with the idea of Japanese-style suicide tactics (although they paid lip service to the idea that the pilot could bail out "at the last minute"). There was the manned version of the V-1/Fi 103, which iirc was actually test flown, although only as a glider, and also a Luftwaffe unit trained to use old fighter planes for air-to-air ramming attacks on Allied bombers. Without looking up details, I think they only did this operationally once and actually managed to take out a couple of bombers. I also seem to recall that at least one German pilot managed to pull of a successful ramming and then actually managed to bail out and survive, although to be fair that was probably far easier to do in an air-to-air engagement and also one over friendly territory as opposed to the Pacific Ocean.
 
Regarding the OP's last point, I believe Germany OTL toyed with the idea of Japanese-style suicide tactics

In fact, the Germans did use suicide aircraft, though in very small numbers. In these attacks, there were no provision for escape. The planes were rammed into the target, just like in the Japanese examples.

During the Battle for Berlin the Luftwaffe flew "Self-sacrifice missions" (Selbstopfereinsatz) against Soviet held bridges over the Oder River. These 'total missions' were flown by pilots of the Leonidas Squadron under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Heiner Lange from 17 April until 20 April 1945, using any aircraft that were available. The Luftwaffe claimed that the squadron destroyed seventeen bridges. However, the military historian Antony Beevor, writing about the incident, thinks that this was exaggerated and that only the railway bridge at Küstrin was definitely destroyed. Beevor comments that "thirty-five pilots and aircraft was a high price to pay for such a limited and temporary success". The missions were called off when the Soviet ground forces reached the vicinity of the squadron's airbase at Jüterbog and were in a position to overrun it.
 
I had a similar idea earlier: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=104952

The overall opinion is higher US losses earlier but Japan runs out of pilots and aircraft faster. My thoughts were the less-trained pilots were expended as kamikaze's so the better-trained pilots have a increased chance of making and surviving conventional attacks. Really good morale booster here BTW...

But Japan will never have enough pilots or planes, making this a very serious drain on resources. And it _still_ won't win them the war...
 
Top