From: St.Petersburg, Russia
The IJN spent nearly 4 years wishing that all this was true. In the real world the Bettys (and Nells) had one really good day against ships (Prince of Wales and Repulse). That same torpedo corps went after the Lexington in February and then Adm Crace's TF at Coral Sea without any effect. After that they spent the rest of their existence completely justifying their reputation (amongst their own crews) as RONSONs (a type of cigarette lighter). The occasional torpedo hit they scored hardly justifies the expenditure of aircrew that went along with it.
Okay, let's count successes of Betties after PoW and Repulse:
BB:1 damaged (disputed, might be B6N)
CA:1 sunk, 3 damaged
CL:3 damaged (or 4, if USS Birmingham was also torpedoed by G4M on 10/08/43, can't find definite information about the attacker's type anywhere)
A bunch of lesser ships (AV Langley, both APAs lost by USN during the war, a couple of destroyers), I'm far too lazy to count exactly.
That's... a very good tally for a plane of which only 2435 (I hope you realise that this is a quite small number for a plane that also was the main ground attacker and one of the main searchplanes of IJNAF) were produced and which was on the losing side. In fact, I don't think any other purely land-based plane on both sides can boast a comparable list. Add here important operational results achieved by repulsing Allied cruisers at Makassar Strait, and by numerous airfield and port attacks during the Japanese offensive in Philippines, Malaya and DEI, as well as far less triumphant, but still vital for holding the line as long as Japs did, action over Darwin, Port Moresby and Solomons, and I fail to see how G4M career can be considered anything other than illustrious. Impossibility of the odds placed against IJNAF land-based bomber force is a weak reason to condemn a plane's design.
That said, Stormwolf is far in the realm of exaggeration too.
< Message edited by FatR -- 7/4/2012 8:54:16 PM >