RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (Full Version)

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



Message

Lemurs! -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/18/2004 11:02:48 PM)

Hi all,

Hmm, quite a few things.

The world is probably coming to an end soon as I completely agree with Nikademus' points.
The Hurri2 was not particularly obsolete in the PTO in '41-'42. It was essentially the most maneuverable aircraft the Allies had in the PTO at this time. The Hurris only real weakness was its top speed.

I essentially hate the P40 line but you have to give it credit for tough construction and high speed. Boom & zoom was of questionable value at this stage of the war defensively as the allied aircraft had limited climb rates.
Sure, you stayed alive but you just left the battle and that Oscar is now attacking your bombers or escorting its own bombers succesfully.

Someone mentioned the Oscars poor top speed compared to P36, P40, F4f. That is a bad comparison as the F4f as far as i know never fought an Oscar, and the -4 could only do 318 with a much slower acceleration than the Oscar.
The P36, depending on armour or lack of, flew from 322 to 348. The 322, 328 speed P36s again were only slightly better than the Oscar and again with low acceleration.
Only the P40 shows the ability to dictate when & where to an Oscar. In SE Asia in '41-'42 there were not that many P40s.

One gaff everyone still makes is like Gary Grigsby in BoB giving the Hurri & Spit a lower maneuver value because of their carberateur. That problem was fixed by the end of July '40 by Rolls Royce field replace kits.
Just a Battle of Britain legend that will not die.

Same with high speed maneuverability problems.
Essentially every country made changes in thier aircraft even without changing model numbers.

The Oscar & Zero were both known to have high speed control problems before the war started. Like several Allied aircraft i could name.
Horikoshi made various changes to the aircraft which eliminated virtually all of these problems. On the Zero this ended up creating a weird vibration effect that no one, as far as i know, has ever been able to really explain.

The Nakajima team was more sucessfull than the Mitsubishi
team in their quest to rid the Oscar of high speed control problems and by April-May '42 they had done so.
I have read of the American test of an Oscar 2 from New Guinea saying that it still had heavy controls and i do not know what to say.
I have read the Nakajima accounts of the changes they made
and their test pilots comments and itt seemed like they fixed the majority of the problem.

Probaly the plane that had the biggest problem with controls was the Me109. Never was fixed as half the problem was the narrow cockpit, same problem the P39 had.

For my next version i am eliminating many of the unused guns in the database and i am going to create nose guns that are otherwise identical with a bit higher accuracy.
Change things a bit.


Mike



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/18/2004 11:56:43 PM)

Yaaaaayyyyyy!!![&o]



RAM -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 12:43:20 AM)

Heya Lemurs!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lemurs
The world is probably coming to an end soon as I completely agree with Nikademus' points.
The Hurri2 was not particularly obsolete in the PTO in '41-'42. It was essentially the most maneuverable aircraft the Allies had in the PTO at this time. The Hurris only real weakness was its top speed.



Is a strange mix of agreement and disagreement there. By saying that the Hurri2 wasn't "particularly obsolete" in the PTO in 1941-42 I guess you're pointing out that in the ETO they were badly outmatched by the german fighters. However if a plane which at the ETO stands little chance, but in the PTO was "not particularly obsolete" means the japanese oposition was of much less quality as that of the german.

In short: what your sentences seem to say say implicitly is that the Ki-43 compared very poorly with the best models England and Germany had at the moment (Spitfires, 109s and 190s). So the Ki-43 could hardly be called a "good" fighter for 1941-42...


quote:

I essentially hate the P40 line but you have to give it credit for tough construction and high speed. Boom & zoom was of questionable value at this stage of the war defensively as the allied aircraft had limited climb rates.
Sure, you stayed alive but you just left the battle and that Oscar is now attacking your bombers or escorting its own bombers succesfully.



As I told Nikademus before, that may be true sometimes, but the rest of the times is not. Diving away doesn't mean you're disengaging. Sometimes yes, but not all the times.

Diving away means you may be gaining separation to build up your energy by zooming back, and a possible tactical advantage. If the enemy can't follow your dive he's out of options to follow and kill you.

If the enemy leaves the chase, then you're free to zoom, win back altitude for the speed you've won in the dive, and re-enter the fight at will after some minutes of winning energy and, if possible, tactical advantage.

if the enemy doesn't leave the chase, then he can't be killing your bombers or escorting his own's...as he is trying to keep pace with you...but as you're in a faster plane with much better diving qualities, he won't catch you.

it's a no-no for the Oscar here.


quote:

Someone mentioned the Oscars poor top speed compared to P36, P40, F4f. That is a bad comparison as the F4f as far as i know never fought an Oscar, and the -4 could only do 318 with a much slower acceleration than the Oscar.
The P36, depending on armour or lack of, flew from 322 to 348. The 322, 328 speed P36s again were only slightly better than the Oscar and again with low acceleration.
Only the P40 shows the ability to dictate when & where to an Oscar. In SE Asia in '41-'42 there were not that many P40s.



which was exactly the reason why the Oscar didn't suck from the very start of the war. They were flown by very competent battle hardened pilots against a very low quality opponent flying in flying coffee cups...


quote:

One gaff everyone still makes is like Gary Grigsby in BoB giving the Hurri & Spit a lower maneuver value because of their carberateur. That problem was fixed by the end of July '40 by Rolls Royce field replace kits.
Just a Battle of Britain legend that will not die.



That's not really true. Floating carburator problems were not adressed until mid-42 with the introduction of the Spitfire IX with modifications made into the carburator to ensure the engine cutted for the first seconds of a -G maneouver (if the move was longer, the engine still cutted...the Merlins never had the highly efficient direct injection of the 109s which allowed for any kind of negative G maneouves). The Spitfires V still had that problem, and until 1943 (when all the spitfire fleet was retrofitted with them) there were quite some planes with the inverted G engine cutting. Many Spitfire Vs were still flying in 1943 (in fact many of them did see service until european V-day), so that was indeed still a trouble for 1942.


quote:

Same with high speed maneuverability problems.
Essentially every country made changes in thier aircraft even without changing model numbers.

The Oscar & Zero were both known to have high speed control problems before the war started. Like several Allied aircraft i could name.


I don't think any allied aircraft by 1941 had the horrible high speed controlability problems the zero and Oscar had. If you think otherwise, I would like to hear to which plane do you refer :).


quote:

Horikoshi made various changes to the aircraft which eliminated virtually all of these problems. On the Zero this ended up creating a weird vibration effect that no one, as far as i know, has ever been able to really explain.



They didn't eventually eliminate the problems. They somehow made them less extreme. The a6M5 could dive at much higher speeds than the A6M2...however it was still a lousy plane on high speeds because the controls ,albeit not stiff as concrete anymore at high Indicated speeds, were still very hard.


quote:

The Nakajima team was more sucessfull than the Mitsubishi
team in their quest to rid the Oscar of high speed control problems and by April-May '42 they had done so.
I have read of the American test of an Oscar 2 from New Guinea saying that it still had heavy controls and i do not know what to say.
I have read the Nakajima accounts of the changes they made
and their test pilots comments and itt seemed like they fixed the majority of the problem.



I also have read that the Oscar never got its hispeed control problems fixed. If you can give me the changes the japanese did to the plane, and the source from where your data comes, then we might be able to discuss that more in-depth :).



quote:

Probaly the plane that had the biggest problem with controls was the Me109. Never was fixed as half the problem was the narrow cockpit, same problem the P39 had.



that's not what the finnish and germans said about the 109. The Messerschmitts up to the early G6 had problems with stiff aileron contros at speeds over 400mph IAS, however aileron and rudder authority were complete. However ,from the late G6 onwards (late G6, G14, G10, K4) the ailerons of the 109s had flettner tabs which greatly helped high speed aileron controlability and reduced a lot the stick forces required to roll the plane at those speeds.



UncleBuck -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 1:41:15 AM)

Just a point of data:

P-47D Max range with Drop tanks 1800 miles. '
P-51D Max range with Drop tanks 1650 miles.
P-38J Max Range with drop tanks 2260 (ferry range) G model max range with large tanks was 1950 miles.


The P-51 was chosen as the Escort fighter not because the other planes could not make the trip, but the P-47 had a lack of Drop tanks, and early on were using smaller British tanks. The P-38 could do it no problem but it was a very expensive plane to build and the Numbers were never there for what needed to be done with escort duties. The P-51 was cheap to build, and fast to build. The fact that it was a decent fighter was secondary. It was inferior in range to both of its contemporaries. For Ground attack and over water flight the P-38 and P-47 were much better suited to the task. The P-38 especially for over water flights had a redundancy with two engines. It would fly and fly well on only one. The P-47 was just a tank. It has a legendary history of taking HUGE amounts of battle damage and still making it home. Combined with the P-47's much heavier armament than either the P-38 or P-51 makes the P-47 the best Ground attack aircraft. The Big Radial engine would work missing entire cylinders. Those 8 fifty caliber machine guns were one of the heaviest in the US arsenal. Combined with the ability to carry 10 HVAR 5" rockets and 1500 lbs of bombs. (The Rockets had to be fired before the guns or the firing mechanisms may be damaged by the ejection ports of the guns.) The P-38 also carried a large attack load, two 2000 lb bombs, or 10 HVAR 5" rockets and two 500 lb bombs.

In air to Air combat believe it or not the P-47 was the top dog of the American fighters here. At the normal combat altitudes it was faster and more maneuverable than both of the other planes. Next would be the P-38 the later models had hydraulic assisted control surfaces and this allowed very good high-speed maneuverability and very good centrally mounted guns.

The P-51 helped win the war but it was not the greatest plane ever made as some claim, same as the Spitfire was not.


UB



Halsey -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 1:54:08 AM)

Not what the USAF Museum says. So you're saying their records are falsified? Just wondering, what sources do you suggest for accurate reporting.

Then I can change my information base.[8D]



Onime No Kyo -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 1:55:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UncleBuck

Just a point of data:

P-47D Max range with Drop tanks 1800 miles. '
P-51D Max range with Drop tanks 1650 miles.
P-38J Max Range with drop tanks 2260 (ferry range) G model max range with large tanks was 1950 miles.


The P-51 was chosen as the Escort fighter not because the other planes could not make the trip, but the P-47 had a lack of Drop tanks, and early on were using smaller British tanks. The P-38 could do it no problem but it was a very expensive plane to build and the Numbers were never there for what needed to be done with escort duties. The P-51 was cheap to build, and fast to build. The fact that it was a decent fighter was secondary. It was inferior in range to both of its contemporaries. For Ground attack and over water flight the P-38 and P-47 were much better suited to the task. The P-38 especially for over water flights had a redundancy with two engines. It would fly and fly well on only one. The P-47 was just a tank. It has a legendary history of taking HUGE amounts of battle damage and still making it home. Combined with the P-47's much heavier armament than either the P-38 or P-51 makes the P-47 the best Ground attack aircraft. The Big Radial engine would work missing entire cylinders. Those 8 fifty caliber machine guns were one of the heaviest in the US arsenal. Combined with the ability to carry 10 HVAR 5" rockets and 1500 lbs of bombs. (The Rockets had to be fired before the guns or the firing mechanisms may be damaged by the ejection ports of the guns.) The P-38 also carried a large attack load, two 2000 lb bombs, or 10 HVAR 5" rockets and two 500 lb bombs.

In air to Air combat believe it or not the P-47 was the top dog of the American fighters here. At the normal combat altitudes it was faster and more maneuverable than both of the other planes. Next would be the P-38 the later models had hydraulic assisted control surfaces and this allowed very good high-speed maneuverability and very good centrally mounted guns.

The P-51 helped win the war but it was not the greatest plane ever made as some claim, same as the Spitfire was not.


UB


Wasn't there a Pre-RR Merlin vesrion of the P-51 that the US exported to Britain in some numbers. What did the Brits do with them anyway?



Tankerace -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 2:07:52 AM)

You mean the Allison engined P-51As? They were used for ground attack, because there Allison engines were crappy at high altitude.



UncleBuck -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 2:09:04 AM)

Yes there was it was but it had an Allison engine. It was used in Armed tactical recon. The Allison had poor High altitude performance and was reduced to low level uses. It was called teh Mustang IA and had cannon instead of machineguns (4 Hispano 20 mm vs. 40r 6 50 cals.) The US used it as P-51A and it was a dive bomber. It carried 2 1000 lb bombs.

UB



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 2:12:34 AM)

There was a P-51A version driven by a 2-stage supecharged Allison engine. Its performance was medicore for the day. Most of them were used in N.Africa in a ground attack mode IIRC.

The P-51 was hands down the best high altitude escort fighter of the war and the best for its stipulated purpose: bomber escort. With drop tanks it had a greater range than any other Allied fighter. Most USAAF sources acknowledge its superiority among the late war USAAF fighters *as fighters.*

As a ground attack plane it left much to be desired. At low altitude it was not the best performer, and its liquid cooled engine with oversized oil cooler underneath made it relatively vulnerable to ground fire. In ground attack, the P-47 was hands down the better plane. P-47 was also pretty good as a high-altitude fighter, but not the primus inter pares as was the P-51. That is why the late war arrival of the hinkey but fast Japanese interceptors was met with the P-51s who, in the Japanese own words, pretty much swept the Japanese interceptors from the sky.

The P-38 is not my idea of a viable candidate for the best fighter in the USAAF in any role. But for the cross-ocean campaign in the vicinity of the Solomons and late war action in the Philippines it was a very good a.c. because of engine redundancy. And the Japanese couldn't really mount an effective defense against good fighters, so pretty much any of the above trumped anything put in the sky by the Japanese.



UncleBuck -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 2:25:17 AM)

Sorry Mdiehl,

But I have to disagree here. the P-51 had an inferior range to both the P-47D and P-38 with drop tanks. As I posted above it was 1650 miles max range for teh P-51D, 1800 miles with drop tanks for teh P-47D and teh P-38J/L was 2200 miles Ferry range and teh G model with large tanks ahd a range of 1950 miles.

The P-47Nwich was used int eh Pacific had the astounding range of 2350 miles with drop tanks, with internal fuel it was 800 Miles. There were 1816 N models made. It was used to escort B-29's from Saipan.

Edit: Also just throwing it out there the Jug flew 546,000 sorties during WWII and had the loss rate of 0.7% per sortie. That is just amazing considering the type of mission they flew with teh 9th AF and in teh PTO as Close air support.

UB



Lemurs! -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 3:08:59 AM)

Ram,

I do not havethe time to go into all of your points but here are a few...

I never stated that i felt that PTO aircraft were as good as ETO aircraft. First, I do not believe either America or Japan were producing as good of aircraft as Britain or Germany. Plus, the PTO had different mission requirements than the ETO.
It is anile to think that 'Japanese planes sucked because they were less impressive in combat than European aircraft'. The Japanese (and to a lesser extent American) aircraft were built for overwater, long range missions, these requirements were just not needed for the primary European aircraft.

On the Merlin carburator problems just read any good history of theengine and you will find that all Merlin Carbs were swapped out or field fixed to remove the vast majority of thecut-out problem. No, a carb will never be as good as a fuel injector in a dive but they were not having the problems they suffered in the Battle for France.

Aircraft with high speed control problems... umm, the p40, P39, P36, P35, Hurricane, Spitfire... would you like me to go on? It was a universal problem and to pretend otherwise is just silly.
You don't seem to understand the problem the Me109 had;
a narrow cockpit (like the p39 as well) limits how far over you can move the stick and limited the force you can apply to the stick.
I read the British post war experiments on this at one time, i do not have the numbers in front of me, but the Me109 was bottom dog in possible force that can be applied.

The two top aircraft were the Fw190 & the P47.

The Zero and the P39 were very cramped as well.

One thing to remember is to look at foreign tests with Japanese equipment with a grain of salt. The average Japanese male in 1942 was 5'4. The average American pilot was what, 5'8? 5'9?

This makes for a more crowded cockpit and i have always wondered how this effected the test results.

We did the same thing in Korea in 1951 when we equipped the South Korean army with Garands firing a 30-06 cartridge. The South Korean male averaged 5'4 again. The Garand knocked them on their ass and broke a few shoulders and collars.

Mike



BoerWar -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 3:53:27 AM)

quote:

Ram,

I do not havethe time to go into all of your points but here are a few...

I never stated that i felt that PTO aircraft were as good as ETO aircraft. First, I do not believe either America or Japan were producing as good of aircraft as Britain or Germany. Plus, the PTO had different mission requirements than the ETO.
It is anile to think that 'Japanese planes sucked because they were less impressive in combat than European aircraft'. The Japanese (and to a lesser extent American) aircraft were built for overwater, long range missions, these requirements were just not needed for the primary European aircraft.


Sanity at last. The F-14/18 are worse than the F-15/16 in a straight up dog fight, but try landing an F-15 on a CV. In the environment where they were employed and which this game is attempting to simulate the Oscar performed better than this simulation appears to allow. I for one have had little luck against the Chinese AF. I agree with assigning the early war bonus to all Japanese fighters.



Captain Cruft -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 12:43:11 PM)

For me the air combat in WitP feels 100% better than in UV. Fighter vs fighter combat really isn't that important in the game anyway ...

OK back to the pointless historical argument :P



Sharkosaurus rex -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 12:57:59 PM)

Maybe the Japs should have declared war against Italy, they would have found lots of planes they could have fought for years and still not need to upgrade their planes. Damn the Pacific Ocean for being so big.



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 4:10:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl


And they still lost far more Ki-43s vs the AVG through April 1941 for each P40 downed. If


Actually, they didn't. AVG overclaims during this period rivaled, if not exceeded the most outragious claims that any Japanese airgroup might have made during this period.



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 4:34:57 PM)

quote:

What I'm trying to say is that the strenghts of the Oscars were of relatively minor importance for WW2-vintage air combat.


I dont agree here but since the focus of the argument was originally on the subject of "rubbish", i'll leave it at that.

quote:


It could use energy tactics, but the RAF pilots always tended to use turning tactics when meeting a foe, something inherited from european experience where british aircraft had better low speed maneouverability and turning that their german counterparts. If the pilot had seen combat in the ETO, this was even more true.


Getting into turning fights was a factor. Not the only factor. I fail to see how this qualifies the Ki-43 as rubbish.

quote:


When confronted with the Oscar the Hurri pilots always tended to enter close fights, and in those fights they were dead meat against the Oscars. Once they realized it and resorted to E-fighting the losses started to go down...still they lost quite a number, but that is because the Hurricane was a very dated design by that time, and the E-fighting techniques and tactics didn't fit well with that aircraft, either (even while it was better than the Oscar in that department).


Naturally losses go down when you begin to take the measure of an opponent. . The Germans quickly learned not to do certain things against both Hurricanes and Spitfires. This helped reduce losses, but neither eliminated them nor made the UK aircraft of less value. Hurricane pilots did use E-tactics in the PTO and i saw no evidence that the plane was less capable of using them. It proved to be no magic solution for them anymore than with the AVG.

quote:


The spitfire was a much faster plane than the Oscar and had similar or better climbrate and acceleration (depending on the version of the Spit we're talking about). The Spit would've had a much better result than a hurricane...


The pilots who arrived late war in the theater their Spitfires probably thought the same thing before they got a harsh lesson. Given the circumstances over Malaya...i doubt the Spitfires would have done substantially better.

quote:


And evidence of actual combat results doesn't give objective facts when that combat didn't happen between similar numbers and similar pilots quality wise, as I already said. Factual data sometimes is VERY subjective because of the particular circumstances of the war at any given moment.

And anyway those combat reports don't speak so well of the Oscar. At least not from the moment when the Oscar faced experienced pilots in capable planes instead of lousy riders with winged garbage cans...


Well here we are certainly going to differ in our approaches. As i said, I'll take research and an analysis of the combat and it's factors over the dubious qualities of whatever airsimm game your garnaring part of your experiences from. It is true that the data can be interpreted in different ways which is where a true rift in our opinion lies. No big shock there....thats why historians will be arguing military history till the sun explodes. You look at some of the conditions and judge essentially that the primary reason for the Japanese plane's success was due to outside factors, soon easily corrected with noticable results. I see the plane's attributes as integral to the success and the data as supportive of this. It is also a perspective of extremes. The Hurricane, while not the UK's premiere model by end 41, doesn't rate as a "flying crate with wings" in my eyes any more than i view the 43 as "rubbish"



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 6:59:01 PM)

quote:

the P-51 had an inferior range to both the P-47D


Bilge.

The max range of the P-51D on the improved ventral tank and with wing tanks was about 2000 miles. On internal fuel the max combat radius was about 900 miles. Late P-47Ds with drop tanks could manage about 1900 miles.

Here is the P-51D with internal tanks and improved ventral internal tank but no drop tanks:
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p51.htm

qua P-47D with drop tanks:
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p47.htm

See also:
http://www.aviation-history.com/north-american/p51.html


Here are various P-51 stats with and without drop tanks. Note that the D/K variant had a 2000 mile combat radius on external fuel. Just edging out the P-47.

http://www.mustangsmustangs.net/p-51/p51specs.shtml

You might also consider reading the USAAF official history of the war. When introduced, the plane had superior combat radius over contemporary models of the P-38 and P-47 with and without external tanks. Late war improvements in propellors and TSCs allowed the P-47 to catch up a little. The N variant of the P-47 was a radical variant. Basically Republic's last effort to make a long range escort that could compete with the superior range of the P-51. But by then the P-51H with adequate range and a max level flight airspeed of 480+ mph was the superior fighter.

Which of course does not detract from the P47 at all. Were I twenty and flying USAAF fighters in 1944 I'd want to be a Juggernaut pilot, not a Mustand pilot.

quote:

The Japanese (and to a lesser extent American) aircraft were built for overwater, long range missions, these requirements were just not needed for the primary European aircraft.


That's a wonderful theory, it's wrong. Japanese a/c were built to maximize performance with a minimum of strategic materials, and to get top performance out of radial engined fighters absent high-octane fuels. The superior range was recognized as a benefit that came with the trade off of the absence of armor and fuel tank protection.

The P-39 and P-40 had no high speed control problems comparable to the A6Ms until you hit IAS in excess of 450 mph. In contrast the A6M and Ki-43 control surfaces became increasingly stiff at IAS in excess of 280 mph. There was no IAS over 300 mph in which an A6M or Ki-43 could hope to roll or turn with a P-39 or P-40. At IAS in excess of 330 mph (which the F4F could only attain in a dive), the F4F could out turn the Zeke. That is why the common practice for an F4F pilot diving out of combat was a diving right split.

The top five a/c IMO were:
The F4U
The P51
The P47
The FW190
The Spitfire XIV.

Were I shooting down a B17, B24 or B29 I'd want the FW190. Were I intercepting a Kamikaze I'd want the F4U. Were I escorting a bomber I'd want the P-51. Were I flying both escort one day and intercept against a bomber another day I'd want the Spit. Were I within 10,000 feet of the ground over enemy territory I'd want the P47.



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 7:09:10 PM)

quote:

Maybe the Japs should have declared war against Italy, they would have found lots of planes they could have fought for years and still not need to upgrade their planes. Damn the Pacific Ocean for being so big.


The Japanese would have been whupped in the Med. The MC-202 folgore was quite the plane -- better than anything the Japanese fielded -- and Italian pilots were quite good. If Italy's industry had not made Germany's gauleiter system look efficient by comparison the Italians might have given the USAAF/RAF really serious problems in Sicily and the Italian peninsula.

quote:

AVG overclaims during this period rivaled, if not exceeded the most outragious claims that any Japanese airgroup might have made during this period.


During this period, Japanese overclaims ranged from 10:1 to 30:1. The AVG's corrected claims are more or less conservatively placed at around 100-150 a/c. During the early part of the war, the AVGs did not get credit for an enemy a/c downed in combat until the wreckage was observed by a ground team. Later, as the AVG began spoiling attacks on airfields they were awarded credit for a/c seen "destroyed" (which of course can mean anything) by any independent observer. That's still roughly a 10:1 favorable kill ratio for the AVG.



Howard Mitchell -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/19/2004 10:01:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RAM
True as it is, the Spitfire always went one step behind the Fw190 development, exception made for the late'43-early'44 period.


And in 1939-1940 as well of course, where the Spitfire pretty much out-preformed the Fw190 in all categories.

(sorry, couldn't resist)



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/20/2004 4:07:36 PM)

AVG and Japanese losses through this period were (roughly) 1:1.



Sharkosaurus rex -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/21/2004 9:51:54 AM)

In my book Buffaloes over Singapore:RAF,RAAF, RNZAF and Dutch Brewster Fighters in Action over Malaya and the East Indies 1941-42 (by Brian Cull) on page 224 Geoff Fisken DFC sums up.

With the Buffaloes, if you had any height at all, you could get away from them by diving straight down, no trouble. We had the diving speed, and would hold together, whereas their planes wouldn't. We had armour plating on our Buffaloes and they had none at all. If you hit one of them they would often burst into flames. They were so very, very light. The only really good chance we had was of we managed to come out of a cloud and they were a few hundred feet below us. We had a chance then, but apart from that, they had too many for us.

The only way we could get away was to dive as fast as we could. They wouldn't follow us down- they wouldn't follow you in a dive. There wasn't much combat at any time. Because they were so much lighter than us, and therefore more manoeuvrable, they had us beat. You would try and get as much height. Naturally the more height you had the better and safer you were. With a height advantage you could get up plenty of speed in a Buffalo. The only way of getting a victory was to bash in and fire a three or four second burst and then get out of it. Otherwise there would be five or six more on your tail. Normally you had to go through their fighters to get to the bombers. They had great cover. There might have been masses of bombers but there would also be loads of fighters as well above, so the strategy was not to take any notice of the fighters- try to get through them as fast as you could. A fighter was no use to you, whereas if you knocked down a bomber, it was carrying a lot of explosives that could kill a lot of people and do a lot of damage to aerodrome, buildings etc. Normally you never worried about the fighters, unless one was sitting on your tail, of course, and then you had to get out of it. You had to be in the right position at the right time to get a plane, be it a deflection or tail shot or whatever. It was only a split second that you had and you had to take it. You would have committed suicide if you tried to dogfight with a Jap. It was an impossibility, so the only thing you could do- if you met them on even terms- was go for about a three or five second burst, and then get out of it because they wouldn't follow you down. If you didn't meet them on even terms- then you had to get out of it.

So Allied pilots were practicing zoom and boom tactics very early over Singapore from the start of the campaign!!!


on other pages it says:
24 Buffalo pilots were KIA. over Malaya while losing 68 destroyed and many write-offs.
15 ..................................over DIE.
The Buffaloes' harvest was:
....................Ki27......Ki48...Ki51...Ki43....Ki46...G3M...A6M...G4M
confirmed.......22........13.......13......2........1..........3....11.......1
probable.........8..........4.........1.......5.........1.........4.....9........0
The Dutch got 16 confirmed. and 10 probs

For each Buffalo it has their serial numbers and interesting points. like:
W8147 243 SqnWP-O: damaged in combat 12/1/42, Sgt GB Fisken RNZAF unhurt; damaged 14/1/42, Sgt GB Fisken RNZAF unhurt; damaged in combat 17/1/42, Plt Off GL Bonham RNZAF unhurt; shot down 22/1/42, Sgt V. Arthur RNZAF killed.

W8187 243 Sqn WP-R: damaged in combat 12/1/42, Sgt MJF Baldwin RAF unhurt; shot down 22/1/42, Sgt MJF Baldwin RAF KiA



Frank W. -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/22/2004 11:26:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharkosaurus rex

Maybe the Japs should have declared war against Italy, they would have found lots of planes they could have fought for years and still not need to upgrade their planes. Damn the Pacific Ocean for being so big.


[:-]

Macchi C205

http://www.iwai.it/mc205.html



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:24:29 AM)

quote:

AVG and Japanese losses through this period were (roughly) 1:1.


Nope.



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:25:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Nope.


yep.



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:28:23 AM)

You have no credibility in the matter. The overwhelming majority of sources do not support your propaganda on this subject.



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:32:04 AM)

Are you referring to the AVG fan sites? Yes...they are using the official credited claims as their source. I'm using Chris Shores Bloody Shambles. A Lundstrom style modern piece of research.



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:41:01 AM)

No, I'm referring to level-headed, skeptical examinations of both sides claims and actual losses. The 64th Sentai lost 14 aircraft in air to air combat vs. the AVG according to two surviving Japanese pilots from that group. It was one of several units with which the AVG tangled. Wrecks shot down by the AVG and counted on the ground by British salvage teams numbered 37 planes. I think it unlikely that every downed plane was found but you can believe what you want.

Even handed, skeptical analysis of the situation shows that the AVG destroyed around 114 a/c in a2a. In exchange they had 14 AVG P-40s shot down.

See, for an on-line example:

http://www.warbirdforum.com/loss.htm



mdiehl -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 12:43:38 AM)

quote:

A Lundstrom style modern piece of research


Not.



Nikademus -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 4:18:23 AM)

quote:



Not.


Yep. Same methods. Same type of research, piecing together what happened using the records of both sides during the conflict. The resulting two volume set is the result of years of work by Mr Shores, Brian Cull and Yashuho Izawa.

For example between 12/8/41 and 1/31/42, 19 P-40's were downed (1 to bomber AA fire) along with 8 Buffalos in exchange for 17 Ki-27 and 2 Ki-43. A total of 15 Ki-21 were lost along with 1 Ki-15 and 1 Ki-30. During this period the weight of the escort and offensive missions were shouldered by the Ki-27.

While scoring a couple local successes, overall neither the AVG nor the RAF prevented the JAAF from completing their missions.



2ndACR -> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. (10/23/2004 5:21:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharkosaurus rex

Maybe the Japs should have declared war against Italy, they would have found lots of planes they could have fought for years and still not need to upgrade their planes. Damn the Pacific Ocean for being so big.


[:-]

Macchi C205

http://www.iwai.it/mc205.html


Oh I did so love this a/c in BTR. Equip a few German squadrons with it and it just chewed up the allies. Also liked the G55.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.9375