Talk:Kamikaze

Confusing sentence

The article states that:

at Midway in June 1942, the Japanese lost as many air crew in a single day as their pre-war training program had lost in a year.

Should this be "... their pre-war training program had created in a year"? —BillC ^talk 09:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree it is confusing, and it may not be correct. A few pages of the cited source are online, and the loss of Japanese pilots is less than would be expected, but many more of the supporting crew were also lost. I did not find support for the assertion in the online text, and therefore will remove it. I have ordered the book and should have it in a few weeks, and will revise the article then if needed. (The book does make an important point: The loss of Japanese pilots at Midway was less than the number lost in the war of attrition in the Solomon Islands.)

The Peattie does not have a full citation in the two footnotes which mention it, nor it is in the bibliography. Once I have the book I will correct that. Kablammo (talk) 13:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Outdated aircraft

The claim is technically false. The Ki-84 and Shiden were just as good as anything the Allies had. The DY4 was one of the fastest strike aircraft in the Pacific, if not the fastest. The "Kate" was no snail either. Please cite and fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A04:4A43:4A7F:5613:0:0:3DDC:B4AE (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Response I'd say the statement is generally true more than 'technically false'. Yes, the Japanese had developed aircraft as good as anything else in the skies. The problem for them was that by the later war they couldn't produce them in any kind of number - they lacked raw materials, tools, etc. It was much cheaper to patch up old planes, fuel 'em up for a one-way trip and sayonara. I do agree that the statement could be qualified. RobotBoy66 (talk) 01:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

The Japanese air fleet was outdated in secondary ways. Even if we disregard these (which I won’t call inherently unfair), the fact that the Japanese had comparable design prototypes is irrelevant bc these never entered mass production and pretty much none ever even saw effective combat. It is a historical fact that the Japanese air fleet in being had fallen far behind the allies technologically and this situation did contribute significantly to the decision to implement/expand the Kamikaze program.

OgamD218 (talk) 07:55, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I’m gonna remove it bc there doesn’t seem to be much remaining disagreement plus the account that started this got blocked. OgamD218 (talk) 02:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

replace the first image

The first image, used for the page's thumbnail thingy, is not the best representation of a kamikaze. It just shows a carrier on fire - only when the context that the carrier got hit by a kamikaze does it make sense. I think we should replace it with a better image, a few of which are actually in the article. The "better image" should show the plane about to kamikaze.

For example we could use:

• File:Kamikaze attacks USS Columbia (CL-56) in Lingayen Gulf on 6 January 1945 (NH 79449).jpg
• File:Kamikaze attacks USS White Plains (CVE-66) on 25 October 1944 (80-G-288882).jpg
• File:Kamikaze zero.jpg
• File:USS Intrepid CV-11 kamikaze strike.jpg

Poopykibble (talk) 04:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I think the existing images can be retained under a new first image, but I would reverse them, putting the pilots ahead of the damage they caused. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Found colorized footage filmed by naval personnel during a battle which looks suitable.

File:Kamikaze WW2 USN.gif

Direct Kamikaze suicide-aircraft strike against US Naval vessel, resulting in visible damage.

Paraxade13 (talk) 15:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• USS Bunker Hill hit by two Kamikazes.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Kamikaze video -- burial of Japanese pilot aboard USS Missouri April 1945

Hi: Migth someone be able to add this very informative video to the "Films" section? Title: "Why did the US Navy Hold a Funeral for a Kamikaze?" 15 mins. video at https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/peopleandplaces/why-did-the-us-navy-hold-a-funeral-for-a-kamikaze/vi-AA1u4KVc?ocid=nl_article_link BillGarrisonJr (talk) 04:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)