Axis aircraft sharing/exchange (like Allies did)

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by gjs238, Jul 23, 2010.

  1. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The Allies shared many aircraft amongst themselves, what if the Axis had also done so, or at least to a far greater extent than they did?
    Wonder how some of the Japanese aircraft would have fared in Europe? To what advantage could the Germans have put them to?
    Same goes for German aircraft use by Japanese.
     
  2. Airframes

    Airframes Benevolens Magister

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    47,727
    Likes Received:
    1,423
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    Examples of the FW190 and Bf109 were sent to Japan, where they were evaluated. This led to development of 'home designed' fighters. I don't know of it happening the other way around though.
     
  3. zoomar

    zoomar Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I have read in older sources (WM Green, mostly) that the Germans were at one time very interested in the Mitsubishi Ki-46 reconnaissance plane and entered into some type of preliminary negotiations regarding license production. This may not be true...I'd like to know more. If true, it's the only instance I know of the Germans seriously considering a Japanese aircraft.

    Copies of both the He-112B and He-100 were provided to Japan. The Japanese hated the He-112 but the Japanese Navy fully intended to adopt the He-100 as a land-based naval interceptor. I believe Heinkel couldn't provide all the jigs and tools, which is too bad for the Japanese and Heinkel. The He-100 would have provided the Japanese with a fighter faster than anything they had until 1944, but one has to wonder how a very complex Heinkel design would have fared as Japanese production and maintenance standards declined. They were also provided examples of the Bf-109 and Fw-190 but only for comparative and research purposes - not potential Japanese operational use.

    At various times the Japanese were interested in both the Fw-200 and the He-177. Again, I'm not true all this is, but I've read that it was Japanese interest and specifications regarding these planes that first led toGerman consideration of the Fw-200 as a maritime recon/bomber as well as the proposals to re-engine the He-177 with 4 independent engines.

    And of course don't forget the Me-163B was adopted in Japan as the J8M and Ki-200 (but never got past the prototype stage)

    Quite frankly, I've always been rather surprised that the Germans never apparently gave serious thought to adopting the A6M zero as either a long range escort fighter or for the never completed Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier. The same would go for the B5N and B6N torpedo bombers. All of these planes would have been far more suited for carrier use than the jury-rigged navalizations of Bf-109 Es and Ju-87s they were planning.

    Talking "Axis", don't forget that the Germans did procure several types of Italian and French planes for a variety of purposes.
     
  4. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That's a bit of a stretch. A few British aircraft like the Hurricane, Spitfire, Mosquito and Mustang served with the U.S. Army Air Corps and VVS in small numbers. Otherwise "sharing" consisted of the USA providing large quantities of aircraft, engines, weapons and aviation gasoline to everyone else.
     
  5. timshatz

    timshatz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    MGR
    Location:
    Phila, Pa
    The Zero as a long range, single engined intruder would've been very difficult to counter. 500 miles from Norway or Brest puts a fighter over Scotland or Ireland. While it would've come too late for BOB, it still would've had an affect.
     
  6. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    The Finns, Romanians and Italians used quantities of Bf109s
     
  7. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,771
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    You mean the Mustang was supplied to the RAF right? It was an American aircraft...
     
  8. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The Mustang was designed to a British specification for procurement by the RAF. To me that makes it a British aircraft which was produced in an American factory.
     
  9. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,691
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    Try in exces of 2500 Hurricanes supplied to the VVS. Thats hardly "very small numbers" There were large numbers of Spitfires and the majority of US night fighters were Beafighters until mid 1944.

    There were no US fighters deployed to the ETO until the end of 1942. These were chiefly because of developmental problems in the main types selected for frontline forces. Most of the US land based airpower supporting operations in North Africa was based around British supplied equipment. Even as late as the Salerno landings a significant proportion of US frontline strength was of British manufacture
     
  10. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That was done to circumvent U.S. export laws. Britain supplied Hurricanes to the Soviet Union. The U.S. in turn supplied large numbers of P-40s to the U.K. Tanks worked the same way. Britain received at least 1 U.S. made tank for every British made tank supplied to the Soviet Union.
     
  11. zoomar

    zoomar Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Wow! That's the first time I've ever heard that strange claim.
     
  12. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,771
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    Actually he is correct for the most part.
     
  13. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #13 Colin1, Jul 24, 2010
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2010
    Technically
    he's right for half of his statement. NA-73X was an attempt by NAA to convince the British Purchasing Commission that they could offer them something better than the P-40. The USAAF, for their part, were largely indifferent to the P-51 early in its career.

    We can only speculate at what might have been omitted if it had been produced to a British specification in a British factory. I doubt it would have included the laminar-flow wing and am pretty certain the cooling drag thrust recovery technique would not have been as effective. British aversion to the .50cal would have meant what? 20mm cannon? It would have entered long-range escort service carrying proportionally less ammo.

    Calling it a British fighter produced in an American factory is stretching it a bit, for me. It does not compare with the Packard Merlin, which was a British powerplant produced in an American factory.

    It is an American fighter that was borne out of a British specification.
     
  14. Kurfürst

    Kurfürst Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,076
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    legal field
    Location:
    Aquincum, Pannonia Prima
    If you check it out, pretty much all the Axis satellite states in Europe converted more-or-less completely later in the war to German type of bombers and fighters and fighter bombers. Norther (fascist) Italy as well... None of these air forces were very large, but many small ones add up to a considerable number.
     
  15. VG-33

    VG-33 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    273
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #15 VG-33, Jul 24, 2010
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2010
    At least Japanese and Italians used german in line engines in their fighters Ki-61, Fiats, Reggianne, Macchi.
    Plus technology transfer from Jumo, BMW, DB...

    Note that the soviet didn't what anything else for some shared planes as Hurricanes in autumn 42 or P-40's and P-47's later. They made instead several requests for regular engines (Merlin, PW...) deliveries to fit on their own airframes. With no success...

    Now, about what if Zero in german service.I don't know if german pilots would be happy to use unprotected planes with the risk to brake a wing during high-G manoueuvres performed at high speed, like with WWI Albatroses and early Fokker monoplanes...
     
  16. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,771
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    Exactly, that is why I was saying he was pretty much correct. I still look at it as an American fighter though that was supplied to the RAF.
     
  17. zoomar

    zoomar Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The original comment:

    " The Mustang was designed to a British specification for procurement by the RAF. To me that makes it a British aircraft which was produced in an American factory."

    is not "pretty much correct". It is also the opposite of what you said yourself. Even if the USAAF had never adopted the Mustang, it would not be a British aircraft unless it was also manufactured entirely in Britain, any more than the P-63 was a Soviet fighter. This statement was one of those deliberate statements that take a grain of truth (the British asked NA Aviation to produce fighters for them) and exaggerate it all out of proportion to make make an interesting claim. I'm not criticisng here - we all do that.

    Actually, it was my understanding that the RAF only asked NA to produce P-40s for them - it was NA itself that proposed designing and building their own fighter. The Mustang is 100% American
     
  18. zoomar

    zoomar Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I'm not quite sure this is equivalent to the situation with the USA- UK-USSR.

    As mentioned, the European situation was essentially a relationship of a single dominant power to satellites, many of whom had fairly little independence, politically or production-wise. Except Italy (which had a fully-developed military aircraft industry and maintained full independence until the armistice) and Finland (which was not a true satellite in the classic sense), local aircraft industries were eventually subsumed into the German aircraft industry and they usually ended up producing German types, as much for Luftwaffe use as for use by satellite airforces. Simple distance conspired against meaningful cooperation between Germany and Japan.

    The Allies consisted of three equal parties, each with a significant aircraft industry producing the entire range of combat planes. True, for obvious geopolitical reasons, the cooperation often ended uip primarily to mean the US supplying US-made planes to the British and USSR, but both the UK and USSR mantained full independence in procurement and produced many of their own designs. The UK also provided many aircraft to the USSR, and the USA procured a number of British types when necessary.
     
  19. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,221
    Likes Received:
    2,050
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    The Japanese did in fact use the He100. They purchased some He100s (as well as the Soviet Union) and built thier own. Thier first prototype even had the evaporative cooling system in the wings.

    As the KI-61, it was a formidable fighter used by IJA but issues with the engine eventually caused them to fit the design with a radial engine resulting in the KI-100 (borrowing from the Fw190's design for the conversion).

    The total amount of KI-61 aircraft produced was 3,159 (and 359 KI-61 airframes were converted to KI-100)
     
  20. zoomar

    zoomar Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2010
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Sorry, but the Ki-61 was not the He-100. It was a completely different airplane as can be easily seen by the wing plan-form, armament package,fuselage contours, and just about everything else except for the mounting of its DB engine. Also, unless I misremember, the specification for the the Ki-60 and Ki61 predated arrival of He-100 examples in Japan. The wide-track undercarriage was a long-standing Japanese practice. It did make some use of broad German design principles involving its engine German engine, and I believe its chief designer had worked some in Germany, but it was a unique Japanese plane.
     
Loading...

Share This Page