(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message


Aussie -> (6/12/2003 9:23:30 AM)

Whoops, Mogami you are right, the Shidens didn't do as well as expected. Those B-17s are tough nuts to crack, the B-25s didn't fare as well.




mogami -> tweaking (6/12/2003 9:56:54 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto
[B]The Shinden was specifically designed to be a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor and go after the B-29s. I would expect it to do the best of all the Japanese planes against unescorted bombers. Those results are down right depressing. Hopefully more tweaking will be done.

Yamamoto [/B][/QUOTE]

Hi, Whole lot of tweaking yet to do. (we have not yet begun to tweak)




Aussie -> Re: Re: rats (6/12/2003 11:11:55 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto
[B]The Shinden was specifically designed to be a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor and go after the B-29s. I would expect it to do the best of all the Japanese planes against unescorted bombers. Those results are down right depressing. Hopefully more tweaking will be done.

Yamamoto [/B][/QUOTE]

The Ki-100 was designed for B-29 interception. The Shiden was used by the IJN (land based) for taking on Corsairs and Hellcats, which it did very well by accounts.




Flying fortress -> (6/12/2003 11:16:59 AM)

WOW! Time out! J7W shindens? They are in the game? Where? they were supposed to be the revolutionary fighter (Us counter counter= P55-ascender). After the war, it was tested by the us, and proven superior over the P-55 after given the high grade 100 octane fuel essential for high performance aircraft. It was even designed to take a jet engine instead of the regular engine. Had they been produced early enough and been manned by skilled pilots, they would have destroyed any level bomber attempting to bomb japan.

Could you tell me how you got them in the game?




Aussie -> (6/12/2003 11:23:15 AM)

Sorry Yamamoto I was on the wrong track - thinking Shidens instead of Shindens. ;)




Flying fortress -> (6/12/2003 12:00:20 PM)

""The Shiden was used by the IJN (land based) for taking on Corsairs and Hellcats, which it did very well by accounts. In Mogami's test however, the bombers are only at 9000 feet.""

The late war fighters could definitely hold it's own and even take airsuperiority from the allies if employed properly, even at high altitudes-Obviously the early war fighters would not be able to do anything at higher altitudes.

On the other hand N1K-1 Shidens and N1K-2 Shiden-kais did veeeeeerrry well against every allied fighter thrown against them in the last days of the war. They combined the sterling handling qualities, manouverability, range, and several key additions learned from the lessons of war: improved armament (4 20mms or 2 12.7mm + 2 20mms), armor plating (Yes the japanese did armor plate their planes later in the war, but not llike us or the russians did), improved diving capabilities, being able to keep up with the satch weave tactics, etc.

N1k2 Shiden-kais were used by the famed 343rd led by the famous Genda, who "stole" veteran pilots such as the youngster Shoichi sugita, who joined up when he was 15 in 1940, Muto, called the Miyamoto Musashi of the air because of his unbelievable skills in the air- in february of 1945 he singlehandedly engaged 12 F6fs and downed 4 of them-, from other squadrons to form a super squad designed to win airsuperiority over Japan. They gained their fame after the battle on March 19, 1945 over Matsuyama. Out numbered completely by US carrier planes, the 54 shiden-kais and 7 shidens shot down 52 of the attacking US planes, which consisted mainly of F6fs, F4Us, and divebombers.

The Japanese had two types of all purpose fighters that could engage any allied fighter and could come out on top even in 45 and had several IMPRESSIVE DESIGNS on the boards: The N1K2 shidenkai and the ki84 Hayates. Even though they used low grade fuel which significantly degraded their performance (up to 60-70%), and were piloted by rookie pilots, they left a very very good combat record against the allies. Of course, after the war the Us tested these planes, and found that while the shidenkais had more powerful armament, the ki 84s had better overall performance and could easily best the latest us planes such as the F8f, P51H, etc when given the same kind of fuel used by us planes.

Which is why it is important to have a hand in production. With good fuel supply, numbers, and good pilots, these planes can defenitely make a difference in a battle, or even the war.

As far as the level bomber intercept issues, for example, the J2M3 was a VERY good bomber intercept with 4 20mms and some having 6 20mms, N1Ks and ki84s were good bomber intercepts as well, KI44s were one of the best bomber interceptors in the Japanese arsenal feared by B-29 crews because of their ability to shoot down B-29s with ease when piloted by a good pilot using good tactics, and an ability to shoot down B-29s even when piloted by rookie pilots. (only worked against unescorted B-29s)

But for other Japanese fighters, I think they are modeled quite accurately: They could down almost any allied fighter, but could not simply down any level bombers. But it is obvious that the other planes such as N1ks Ki84s, Ki44s, and definitely J7Ws would have better results against Us bombers in real life, especially if they were unescorted. And even if they were, n1ks and ki84s could hold its own against any escorts, allowing the bomber destroyers to do their job unmolested.

As for the light japanese fighters, they are depicted very well. Early war fighters don't stand a chance to down allied 2~4 engined bombers (historically they had trouble downing all us fighters and bombers because of their poor armament and the good Us armor protection)




herbieh -> Pilots/planes (6/12/2003 12:26:20 PM)

Seems to me with Mogamis testing that Matrix will get it right for the plane performance, what it really means is that us IJN commanders will have to make it a real high piority to conserve our good pilots (put em in mothballs) and wait until the really good planes turn up, so that 1944/45 wont be a total depressing exercise. the interesting thing will be trying to get squadron experience up, balanced against the current imperatives that the war will be imposing. At the moment Luskan is giving a real good show, but in WITP, would Luskan now choose to try to hold Lunga with his very best, or send em back to Japan, or the Phillipines for the next big round.

It sure is going to be good.
I think Mogami should be thanked for the careful testing and his very realistic and considered views.
I think Matrix will get it right.:D




Drongo -> (6/12/2003 5:15:26 PM)

Posted by Mogami
[QUOTE]Not very much??? 114 compared to 85 and 91 (the difference is equal to the unopposed night attack by 50 bombers.)[/QUOTE]

The damage reports will vary fairly widely, even for the same raid when the turn is replayed over and over (and without FOW). I don't think its worth using 114 as the base figure for unintercepted raid damage.

I ran 10 WITP tests for 108 B-17s attacking Lae from PM. Lae had no CAP or FLAK. Weather was always clear. Despite no air casualties and same numbers of a/c, reported AAR results would give anywhere from 50 to 150 runway hits for each time the raid was re-run.




Raverdave -> Re: Pilots/planes (6/12/2003 5:52:50 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by herbieh
[B] At the moment Luskan is giving a real good show, but in WITP, would Luskan now choose to try to hold Lunga with his very best, or send em back to Japan, or the Phillipines for the next big round.

[/B][/QUOTE]

I shudder to think what Luskan will be like in WiTP ! The way that he saves units/pilots.....I am sure that his dad must be a banker!




Drongo -> (6/12/2003 6:28:51 PM)

Posted by Raverdave
[QUOTE]I shudder to think what Luskan will be like in WiTP ! The way that he saves units/pilots.....I am sure that his dad must be a banker![/QUOTE]

I shudder to think of the pair of you in full flight with WITP.




Luskan -> (6/12/2003 6:36:24 PM)

Well, I plan to play Raver as the IJN as well as the USN. Could take a while.

My hopes for WITP are these:

1. The IJN replacement pilot experience drops according to how careful you are with your pilots.

2. Experience has a slightly bigger effect on battles.

3. Morale is represented as morale, and a second form of fatigue created to show whatever the rpesent morale indicator shows. Flying at low level doesn't decrease morale - and niether does kicking an enemy butt!

4. Giveaway messages thrown out.

If only Raver had decided on a one prong attack rather than a two prong attack, I'd have his head on a wall somewhere.




mdiehl -> (6/12/2003 9:46:40 PM)

[QUOTE]N1k2 Shiden-kais were used by the famed 343rd led by the famous Genda, who "stole" veteran pilots such as the youngster Shoichi sugita, who joined up when he was 15 in 1940, Muto, called the Miyamoto Musashi of the air because of his unbelievable skills in the air- in february of 1945 he singlehandedly engaged 12 F6fs and downed 4 of them-, from other squadrons to form a super squad designed to win airsuperiority over Japan. [/QUOTE]

Funny, that claim has never been substantiated in US unit records. Make that, "single handedly engaged 12" and "shot up one of them almost as badly as his plane was damaged."

The late war Japanese aircraft were not REMOTELY the equal of late war Allied a/c. Under perfect conditions the Japanese a/c had some good performance characteristics. The frequency of these conditions was inversely proportional to the frequency of Allied raids.




Raverdave -> (6/12/2003 10:14:01 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Flying fortress
[B] Muto, called the Miyamoto Musashi of the air because of his unbelievable skills in the air- in february of 1945 he singlehandedly engaged 12 F6fs and downed 4 of them-, from other squadrons to form a super squad designed to win airsuperiority over Japan. They gained their fame after the battle on March 19, 1945 over Matsuyama. Out numbered completely by US carrier planes, the 54 shiden-kais and 7 shidens shot down 52 of the attacking US planes, which consisted mainly of F6fs, F4Us, and divebombers.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Are you able to supply a reference for these two engagements? I would be interested to read them in full........more so the second one about the 52 US planes being shot down in one dogfight.




Nikademus -> (6/12/2003 10:49:07 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drongo
[B]Posted by Mogami


The damage reports will vary fairly widely, even for the same raid when the turn is replayed over and over (and without FOW). I don't think its worth using 114 as the base figure for unintercepted raid damage.

I ran 10 WITP tests for 108 B-17s attacking Lae from PM. Lae had no CAP or FLAK. Weather was always clear. Despite no air casualties and same numbers of a/c, reported AAR results would give anywhere from 50 to 150 runway hits for each time the raid was re-run. [/B][/QUOTE]

was afraid of that.....hence my request for running the test multiple times.




mogami -> Research (6/12/2003 10:55:19 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Raverdave
[B]Are you able to supply a reference for these two engagements? I would be interested to read them in full........more so the second one about the 52 US planes being shot down in one dogfight. [/B][/QUOTE]

19 March 1945:
Vice Admiral (later Admiral) Marc A. Mitscher's Task Force 58 carriers USS ESSEX (CV-9), INTREPID (CV-11), HORNET (CV-12), WASP (CV-18), HANCOCK (CV-19), BENNINGTON (CV-20) and the BELLEAU WOOD (CVL-24) make the first carrier attack on the Kure Naval Arsenal. More than 240 aircraft attack the battleships HYUGA, ISE, YAMATO, HARUNA, the carriers AMAGI, KATSURAGI, RYUHO, KAIYO and other ships.

The fleet is defended vigorously but unsuccessfully by 54 Kawanishi N1K2-J Shiden-Kai ("George") fighters of Captain (later General and CINC, JSDF*) Genda Minoru's (of AKAGI at PH) 343rd NAG based at Matsuyama airfield. The 343rd's pilots claim 52 aircraft shot down against 16 losses.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/Hyuga.html


Hi, I'm trying to find out about this as well. I've never heard of it before. (52 planes in one combat is a lot of planes) But this site says the Japanese were flying the "George" not the Shinden J7W




mdiehl -> (6/13/2003 12:28:49 AM)

I'd read that general account too. The operative word is "claimed." I'd bet a buck that the 52 claimed turned out in reality to be 5 damaged 2 destroyed.




Chiteng -> (6/13/2003 3:08:49 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mdiehl
[B]I'd read that general account too. The operative word is "claimed." I'd bet a buck that the 52 claimed turned out in reality to be 5 damaged 2 destroyed. [/B][/QUOTE]

Of course =) Because the USN pilots never exagerate,
and Japanese always do?

Your chauvinism is appalling




Yamamoto -> (6/13/2003 4:33:58 AM)

The shinden never flew in combat in WW2. The prototype first flew on August 3, 1945. It would have been a terror, espicially once the turbojet engine had been fitted.

I owned a plane that looked a bit like the shinden... canard design, swept back wings, and a pusher engine in the back. That's where the similarity ended though; mine was only a homebuilt aircraft and not a glamorous fighter.

Yamamoto




Yamamoto -> (6/13/2003 4:36:24 AM)

Another picture since I don't know how to post more than one per message.

Yamamoto




Flying fortress -> (6/13/2003 4:40:02 AM)

""Are you able to supply a reference for these two engagements? I would be interested to read them in full........more so the second one about the 52 US planes being shot down in one dogfight.""

I found the first one. It's actually in the CFS2 maunal pg 192:eek: In the the hall of fame section. " Over Tokyo in mid february, his group (some say it was Muto alone) took on twelve f6fs and downed foru of them. Muto died in combat over the Bungo Strait on July 24 1945."

""Konnichi wa minasama,
in the "Zero" book by Okumiya Masatake, Horikoshi Jiro with Martin Caidin, pbs. Bantam 1991, pages 330-331, among a very vivid and quite detailed description it is written that "Flight Warrant Officer Kinsuke (?) Muto of the Yokosuka Navy Air corps" took on twelve Hellcat fighters alone in his Shiden-Kai, downing four and forced the remaining eight to "break off the engagement and flee the area". Also, "pilots watching from Atsugi did not know the name of the pilot...".
The above story is repeated and confirmed in the MA 439, pbs. 1994, author: Oshio Kazuhiko. Pilot's name is Muto Kanayoshi.
On the other hand, in the Osprey's "I.J.N. Aces 1937-45" by Henry Sakaida, 1998, pages 93-94-95, pilot's name is Kaneyoshi Muto and the above story is concidered a myth made by the press of the time "surviving to this day". Muto was not alone but together with "his squadronmates""
http://www.j-aircraft.com/faq/navy_aces.htm#Ens.%20Muto%20Kanayoshi's%2012%20minus%204%20Hellcats!

The battle he died in is the this one where he was shot down by Maj. "?" Applegate piloting a F4u. The attack consisted of 8 british and US carriers against Kure Naval Yards. The defending force consisted of just 21 N1k2s from Omura base in Matsuyama. The Japanese lost 6pilots in this engagement. But all of them were irreplacable pilots who were hard-core veterans who had seen action from the Chinese-japanese war in 1936.

""The late war Japanese aircraft were not REMOTELY the equal of late war Allied a/c. ""

"Despite some serious defects inherent in the Homare 21 engine, the Shiden Kai proved itself to be an outstanding fighter in the hands of a skilled pilot. The Violet Lightning Modified's high-altitude performance was rather poor, and its center of gravity was too far aft. Thus, it had difficulties recovering from stall spin. Even so, Officer Kinsuke Muto of the 343rd Kokutai single-handedly engaged twelve US Navy Hellcats. He managed to destroy four of the twelve, forcing the others to break off. "

http://fighterace.jaleco.com/Information/museum/jf_8.htm

Check out this page for interesting info on the N1k and the N1k2
http://www.wwiitech.net/main/japan/aircraft/n1k1/"
http://m2reviews.cnsi.net/others/books/cleavergeorgebook.htm
http://www.air-navy.com/shiden.htm
http://www.nasm.si.edu/nasm/aero/aircraft/kawanish_n1k2.htm

"In spite of a troublesome engine and landing gear prone to buckle, the Ki84 was loved by its pilots, whether as a fighter of a fighter bomber. When allied pilots had achance to test one they found out why: It easily bested the P-51H and the P-47N"
--Aircraft of WWII-Jane's




mdiehl -> (6/13/2003 5:10:27 AM)

Sounds like the same dogma about Muto has been posted in several web sites and has its origins in late war Japanese propaganda. I wonder which USN units were allegedly involved? Should not be too hard to find our given the involvement of UK CVs. In that event one ought to be able to find out how many F4Us, F6Fs or whatever were lost.

Back to you on the Janes' thing. The phrase "easily bested" strikes me as hyperbole, since the N1K2 was a slower, less reliable ac than most US models. IIRC, it could "easily" best the F6F, but not the F4U, P47, or P51. On a good day the N1K2 might have been a worthy adversary for these otehr models.




Flying fortress -> (6/13/2003 5:11:28 AM)

According to this Japanese book "The six shidenkais" I had painstakingly translated, {Isbn4-7698-2283-9 c0195 Y(I can't make the Yen mark)838E} It gives a very accurate account of the battles that the 343rd went through. This is how I found out that it was Maj. applegate's F4u who was able to shoot down Muto's N1k2.

The battle on 3/19/1945 started with a japanese scout plane "Saiun" sighting a american strike force headed for japan. The pilot of the Saiun, Takada (I have no idea how to read the first name) along with 2other crew reported the presence of about 100us planes, and after experiencing engine trouble, they were surrounded by us fighters. With his damaged aircraft, Takada desperately attempts to ram one of the attacking fighters, hits one, and bounces off to hit another. Resulting in 2us and 1japanese planes going down. Later in the year showa 49 (Could anyone tell me what year this is) a memorial was built.

Immediately after recieving the report the all of 343rds planes are scrambled. (group 701-16planes, hayashi's 407th-17planes, kanno's 301st-21 planes joins the 7 N1k1 shidens already on CAP.--total 61planes)

This day the "setonaikai"- bay of seto- was filled with colorful dye in the ocean. The brown marked Japanese, and the colorful red yellow, and other colors marked us. This day we lost 48 f6fs and f4us and lost 4 sb2cs as well.

I will keep looking for additional sources, but I am pretty sure this result is quite accurate--combined with veteran pilots with good planes--even with lowgrade fuel which severely degraded the plane's performance, the 343rd and the Yokosuka were still deadly. But fortunately for us, the japanese had only 2 good squadrons that could take on allied planes and not get wiped out--the 343rd and the Yokosuka squad.

In the end both of these squads were virtually steamrolled by us as they had to fly against numerically impossible odds.

By the way muto was an interesting story. After the loss of Sugita, Genda did a pilot swap with yokosuka for muto to replace sugita. That's how muto ended up in the 343rd.




Flying fortress -> (6/13/2003 5:18:52 AM)

For us, however, I think that the F8f probably would have been the answer for any late war japanese fighters. Coupled with excellent manueverbility, speed, and firepower, these would have been the ultimate fighters:) The design was affected by the zero captured in the aleutians in 42.

Any ideas?




mdiehl -> (6/13/2003 5:21:05 AM)

OK, here's the P51D and H specs. Both FAR superior to the N1K2.

[QUOTE]
Specs of the P-51H-5-NA:
One Packard Merlin V-1650-9 twelve-cylinder Vee liquid cooled engine rated at 1380 hp for takeoff and a a war emergency power of 2218 hp at 10,200 feet and 1900 hp at 20,000 feet with
water injection.

Performance: Maximum speed was 444 mph at 5000 feet, 463 mph at 15,000 feet, and 487 mph at 25,000 feet.[/QUOTE] (MUCH much faster than the Shiden)

[QUOTE]Range in clean condition was 755 miles at 359 mph at 10,000 feet, 1975 miles at 239 mph at 10,000 feet. Range with two 62.5 Imp. gall. drop tanks was 1150 miles at 339 mph at 10,000 feet and 1530 miles at 243 mph at 10,000 feet.

An altitude of 5000 feet could be reached in 1.5 minutes, 15,000 feet in 5 minutes.[/QUOTE] (That beats the tar out of the N1K1's climb rate of 7 minutes 50 seconds to 19.9K feet).

[QUOTE]Service ceiling was 41,600 feet.[/QUOTE] (Comparable to Shiden)

[QUOTE]Weights: 6585 pounds empty, 9500 pounds normal loaded, and 11,500 pounds maximum. Dimensions: Wing span was 37 feet 0 inches, length was 33 feet 4 inches, height was 8 feet 10 inches, and wing area was 235 square feet.[/QUOTE]

And, from the USAF museum:

[QUOTE]SPECIFICATIONS P-51D
Span: 37 ft. 0 in.
Length: 32 ft. 3 in.
Height: 13 ft. 8 in.
Weight: 12,100 lbs. max.
Armament: Six .50-cal. machine guns and ten 5 in. rockets or 2,000 lbs. of bombs.
Engine: Packard built Rolls-Royce "Merlin" V-1650 of 1,695 hp.
Cost: $54,000
PERFORMANCE
Maximum speed: 437 mph.
Cruising speed: 275 mph.
Range: 1,000 miles
Service Ceiling: 41,900 ft. [/QUOTE]

Again, much superior in all respects to the Shiden. I noted with interest the Shiden's two rifle-caliber popguns and 2x20mm. Clearly not a heavily armed plane.

On to the others....

OK, this from some F4U-4 fanboy website comparing the F4U to the P51. All these stats are of course verifiable in other sources.

[QUOTE]Maximum speed:
F4U-1: 417 mph @ 19,900 ft.
F4U-4: 446 mph @ 26,200 ft.

The -4 displays a 29 mph speed advantage, but more importantly, does it at a considerably greater altitude. The F4U-4 is actually 10 mph faster than the P-51D at the Mustang’s best altitude.

Rate of climb:
F4U-1: 3,250 ft/min.
F4U-4: 4,170 ft/min.

While the -4 has a more powerful engine, it also weighs more than the F4U-1. This marked increase in climb rate can be attributed to the more efficient 4 blade propeller as well as the higher power of the up-rated powerplant. The increase moves the Corsair into stellar company with fighters such as the P-38L and the F7F Tigercat. The F4U-4 climbs at a rate 20% better than the P-51D.

There is little doubt that the Corsair was likely the greatest load carrying fighter of its era. There is little to compare to it except perhaps late-war models of the P-47, which still fall somewhat short in maximum load.[/QUOTE]

Again. MUCH much faster than the Shiden. Better armed. Greater climb rate.

And of course, these speeds and climb rates are the theoretical maxima. But since the Shiden routinely had poor quality fuel, and their engine reliability stank, one would not expect them to perform at or near spec as much as the Allied ones.




mdiehl -> (6/13/2003 5:29:54 AM)

Clearly the F8F was not required. The US planes were far superior. If the "easily best" quote comes from a Jane's volume, clearly the editor screwed the pooch on that assessment.




Flying fortress -> (6/13/2003 5:47:19 AM)

Just for the sake of argument, the p-51 series was a great one combining good firepower, armor, speed, and range. Then again if it's looking at the specs, the f2a buffalo and the p36 , and the p39s should be able to hold it's own or best the zero. But they didn't. They had about the same top speed, armament, except for the us having armor and the japanese having longer range. The buffalo and the p36 were retired and the p39s were mediocre at best. Why? poor tactics, poorly trained pilots when compared to japan, lack of maneuverability, and other factors all contributed to the early setbacks for us.

The thing about n1ks, especially n1k2s and ki84s were they still combined the sterling manueverability of the zeros, yet had decent speed, power, firepower (not the early versions with the 2 12.7mm + 2 20mms but the n1k2s with 4 20s and eventually 6 20s, though forutnately for us the ones with 6 20mms never saw service.), and armor (though not as much as the us). Spec wise, it's obvious that the n1k2s and ki84s were not all that great, but in the air, they were good and proved that it could hold its own against us fighters.

Anyone played cfs2? Believe me, as a us pilot in a late war fighter, you really hate to see n1k2s. They are a huge pain the the a**.

Although the p51s, p47, were good speed fighters with excellent roll rate, they were not as maneuverable as n1ks or ki84s. Even in Europe, our tactics were to use slashing attacks to take out the enemy (which we did very well) because when engaged in a dogfight, the p51s and the p47s quickly lost speed and would lose the advantage of speed. We used superiority in numbers, armor, and their tactics which used the strongest points of the p51s and the p47s--speed--climing ability--diving ability-- But if a skilled japanese pilot (there weren't too many of those at the end of the war) could use the strengths of the n1ks and the ki84s--being able to keep up with the satch-weave, they stood a good chance against the us, and with their 4 20mms, a short encounter with one could be quite deadly. Which is the reason the 343rd fought so well against f4us and f6fs.

The exception is the f4u. It was a very good all around fighter with everything. Now, they would have definitely be a verrry good match with n1ks and ki84s.




Flying fortress -> (6/13/2003 5:51:23 AM)

I think I'm done. My fingers are starting to hurt, and my dinner is starting to get cold:mad: Hey, but reheat is definitely good.:D But I'm sure we will continue this at a later time.:p




mdiehl -> (6/13/2003 10:16:51 AM)

Most of what you posted is half-right. The P39 WAS a better plane than the Zeke... at low altitude. In the realm of "couldawouldshoulda," had the darned turbosupercharger been left in the thing, it would have been the best fighter of the war until late 1943. The F2 WAS as fast as the A6M... in the early unarmored variants. The F2A3 (which fought at Midway) was considerably slower, owing to increased weight. The P36 as designed was faster than the Zeke, and did not tend to burn energy as fast in combat, but by 1939 it was clear that the future was in new engines/ increased thrust and high speed aircraft (in part because it was assumed that faster a/c would be needed to deal with bombers). With the exception of the P39, of these a/c the speed difference between the A6M and the others was marginal... not enough of an advantage to really give the higher sspeed a/c a strong edge. One plane often overlooked is the F4F because it's max level flight airspeed was slower than the A6M. At speeds in excess of 280 mph, however, it's maneuverability was comparable to the A6M (whose maneuverability actually declined with increased speed). In a turning dive in excess of 350 mph, the F4F was both faster and more maneuverable (faster because the F4F could exceed 380 mph in a dive... at which speed the A6Ms usually broke up).

Frankly I find it hard to believe anyone would defend the N1. It was in fact a poor accelerator, mediocre climber, inadequately armed, insufficiently fast pig... not the svelt keeps-airspeed-no-matter-how-you-fly-it greyhound that you imagine it to be. It was barely adequate to contain the F6F. (And the F6F was, frankly, a mediocre aircraft).

The Ki-84 is the ONLY aircraft manufactured by Japan in WW2 that excites my interest. With a top speed of just over 400 mph it actually had a prayer of catching a B29 (the N1 had a whole 14 mph over a high flying B29), and airspeed to make it a worthy opponent to any of the combatants top-line a/c. It had 12.7mm MGs and 20 mm cannons, so it packed much more punch than the crummy N1.

Neither the N1 or the Ki-84 came close to the maneuverability of the A6M. The Ki-84 was comparable in mvr to the P47. The N1 comparable to the F6F. Neither of these Japanese models had either the roll rate, or faster times to 180 direction change than the F4U or the P51 at high speed. Both these American a/c were both more maneuverable and faster. At this point in the war, however, maneuverability was less often of importance than speed. When vastly different a/c encountered each other, a maneuver maximizing model vs an energy maximizing model, the nearly-invariant winner was the energy ship. Were this NOT the case, one would have expected the Oscar, or better still the Sopwith Camel, to have swept the skies during WW2.

As to maneuverability and tactics. I've been down this road many times before. The USAAF and USAF has emphasized speed over mvr for 60 years because the high-speed a/c controls the fight. In the early months of the war the P40 in the hands of the AVG ATE all the Japanese maneuver models (if you believe Erik Schilling this included A6Ms, but I'm not convinced they weren't the even more maneuverable but largely worthless Oscar).

This is also one of the reason I think vectored thrust a/c are a dead end. But that's a whole 'nother debate.




Aussie -> (6/13/2003 10:32:12 AM)

Back to the topic of fighters vs heavy bombers - Mogami please keep the test results coming in. Escorted bomber raid results should be particularly interesting, as well as B-29 homeland raids. Need an extra hand with testing or data anlaysis let me know, happy to help. :)

Cheers

Dan




mogami -> B-29 (6/17/2003 10:31:40 PM)

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/01/42

Air attack on Lunga , at 67,97

Japanese aircraft
J7W Shinden x 81

Allied aircraft
B-29 Superfortress x 106

Japanese aircraft losses
J7W Shinden x 1 destroyed
J7W Shinden x 4 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-29 Superfortress x 11 destroyed
B-29 Superfortress x 27 damaged

PO2 B.Sugiyama of 30th Ftr.Sentai is credited with kill number 2

Port hits 3
Port fuel hits 3
Port supply hits 1

Attacking Level Bombers:
11 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
18 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
18 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
8 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
15 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
12 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
2 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
2 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress at 23000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875