Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Japanese Carrier Planes

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Japanese Carrier Planes Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 5:22:41 AM   
okami


Posts: 404
Joined: 5/23/2007
Status: offline 		Did any of the late war A6M7/8 or A7M2 ever get stationed on carriers?

_____________________________

"Square peg, round hole? No problem. Malet please.
Post #: 1
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 7:19:46 AM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline 		I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to okami)
Post #: 2
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 9:41:33 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: okami

Did any of the late war A6M7/8 or A7M2 ever get stationed on carriers?


No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to okami)
Post #: 3
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 1:16:39 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		I think FK is right though, a6/8 and A7 were developed with the idea of using them on carriers, so to me they should be CV Capable. The fact that they weren't is entirely due to the IJN not having operational CV's in 1945.



_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 4
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 1:23:25 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		This is true, but also not the original question.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to okami)
Post #: 5
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 7:25:50 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Wasn't the J9Y Kikka being designed for carrier operations as well?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 6
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 9:50:59 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		I don't think the J9Y was intended to be CV capable. I know the me262 had a very low accelation rate, requiring a very long runway to take off. I can't imagine the Japanese somehow solved that problem.

_____________________________


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 7
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/23/2008 11:17:51 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Perhaps they fitted it with a snorkel......


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 8
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/24/2008 3:52:35 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline 		 I do not think Japan had any carriers they still considered "operational", as in the airgroups not having been transfered to land bases by this time


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 9
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/25/2008 12:58:41 AM   
msieving1


Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.


In the Japanese Navy aircraft designation system, A indicated a carrier based fighter, and J indicated a land based fighter. N indicated a floatplane fighter. If an aircraft was converted to a different role, the letter for the new type was added at the end, after a hyphen. So:

A6M2: carrier based fighter
A6M2-N: carrier based fighter converted to floatplane fighter
J2M: land based fighter
N1K1-J: floatplane fighter converted to land based fighter.

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 10
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/26/2008 8:02:02 PM   
okami


Posts: 404
Joined: 5/23/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: msieving1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.


In the Japanese Navy aircraft designation system, A indicated a carrier based fighter, and J indicated a land based fighter. N indicated a floatplane fighter. If an aircraft was converted to a different role, the letter for the new type was added at the end, after a hyphen. So:

A6M2: carrier based fighter
A6M2-N: carrier based fighter converted to floatplane fighter
J2M: land based fighter
N1K1-J: floatplane fighter converted to land based fighter.


Then according to this the A6M7/8 and A7M2 which are carrier capable should be ok to place on carriers?

_____________________________

"Square peg, round hole? No problem. Malet please.

(in reply to msieving1)
Post #: 11
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/26/2008 9:11:02 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		I don't think it would be gamey at all to place A7 or A6M8 on CVs.  Organic CV units can't upgrade to them, but using LB Daitai in that role I think is kosher.

Using J2M or George on CV would remain, in my mind, very gamey and verboten


_____________________________


(in reply to okami)
Post #: 12
RE: Japanese Carrier Planes - 9/28/2008 7:05:37 AM   
scott64


Posts: 4019
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		A carrier plane is a carrier plane. Maybe the same argument could be said whether or not to put corsairs on carriers. If the sides were switched and we did not have those carrier planes. 

_____________________________

Lucky for you, tonight it's just me


Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Japanese Carrier Planes Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.923