Iwo Jima N/A

[Richard]

I have been reading yet another account of the WWII battle for Iwo Jima, this time from an airman's perspective. After all these years of reading the history of the march up the islands to take the war to the Japanese homeland I still have an unanswered question.

Why did we not just skip Iwo altogether? We had neutralized the effectiveness of the airfields on Iwo and Iwo was not necessary for our long range bombers to carry the war to Japan. Taking Iwo was not a flanking tactic so why was it decided Iwo needed to be captured and not simply contained?

 

[ejensen]

I think I remember they needed an abort/alternate field for the B29s. One's that couldn't make it home. If so, pretty high price.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Richard:

All I can relate is what I've read. Had some friends there, but they were grunts and probably couldn't tell you much more than the fact they were told to take it!!

From Iwo, the Japanese were able to track U.S. bomber movements and report them on the way to Tokyo and other cities. Giving some warning to the mainland. The island had two airfields and a third was being built. The Japanese flew missions against bomber groups and patroled within range of the island. Japanese planes also attacked U.S. bases in the Marianas from there. It was in effect a heavily defended aircraft carrier.

Once taken, U.S. B29s could be escorted by fighters based at Iwo. Also, I do believe several B-29s that were damaged used the base as an emergency field. (The bombing run to Japan was a 1,000 mile round trip.)

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

 

[gturner]

I have been reading yet another account of the WWII battle for Iwo Jima, this time from an airman's perspective. After all these years of reading the history of the march up the islands to take the war to the Japanese homeland I still have an unanswered question.

Why did we not just skip Iwo altogether? We had neutralized the effectiveness of the airfields on Iwo and Iwo was not necessary for our long range bombers to carry the war to Japan. Taking Iwo was not a flanking tactic so why was it decided Iwo needed to be captured and not simply contained?

Here is a link that says about the same thing the other two said.
Gary
http://www.iwojima.com/battle/battlea.htm

 

[Frank Browne]

I think I remember they needed an abort/alternate field for the B29s. One's that couldn't make it home. If so, pretty high price.

It also was home base for several squadrons of P-51 Mustangs that provided escort to the B-29's and did considerable damage attacking ground targets as well. Before the island was even secure and with heavy fighting still going on, damaged B-29's began landing there instead of having to ditch in the sea. It was seen as a necessary campaign.

 

[bbchien]

Remember, that if the USN pilots of Task Force 6 knew that we weren't going to come get them after they bailed out, do you think any of them would have flown? That was 1970.

 

[mikea]

I think I remember they needed an abort/alternate field for the B29s. One's that couldn't make it home. If so, pretty high price.

Yep! Jann's late dad, Joe. who was a gunner/photographer on a B-29 crew from Tinanen said, "Those Marines saved our a**ess!" They were very grateful to have an emergency landing site. Otherwise it was nothing but water all the way to Japan.

Many men lived because that runway at Iwo was there.