They already had incendiaries of their own, but didn't have enough oil to make all the napalm they'd need, nor the access to the solidifying compounds.What if the unit 731 discovered Napalm in 1938? Could this made Japan defeat china, or would only makes the conflict worse with the same results? What about the war against the allies in pacific?
Well they did develop Attack Aircraft:Did the IJNAS and IJAAF even have close support doctrine? Dropping Ordnance is the easy part, dropping it on the right troops is hard, see Marine vs USAAF close support efforts.
Dropping Napalm on cities doesn't really do more than the Incendiaries they used OTL
In Japan, the Imperial Japanese Navy had developed the Aichi D3A dive bomber (based on the Heinkel He 70) and the Mitsubishi B5M light attack bomber
. It subsequently was used in combat in Manchukuo (Manchuria) and in north China during the initial stages of the Second Sino-Japanese War, where it could make use of its good maneuverability to support ground troops. It was considered a rugged ground-attack aircraft, but the supercharger of its liquid-cooled engine was a constant source of problems.[1]
Well they did develop Attack Aircraft:
Sure, but the indication that they had ground attack aircraft means they had the doctrine, the coordination is a technology issue in term of communication tech and having the right organization, which comes from combat experience; Japan had a lot more of that by 1939 than anyone but maybe the Germans thanks to the Condor Legion and effort put into learning the ins and outs of ground support. The IJA did have the aircraft, concepts, and need, but I think the communication tech was lacking. Germany, with a much more advanced electronics industry, was still working that out in 1939. The US, with THE most advanced electronics industry in the world still was working out the comm tech issue even in 1943.Well, the USAAF had the A-24, and didn't have the Doctrine for real close support. Coordination is the hard part, not the tech.