Corsair vs Zero
- Thread starter Cougar
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
First of all, i didnt say the Spitfire was inferior to Zero 
But in some ways the Spitfire was inferior to the Zero, like in a Turning dogfight at 300mph But unlike the Zero, the Spitfire wouldnt fall apart almost immediately after being hit by a good spray of 50.cal's
Also the Zero's maneuverability would suffer somewhere between 15,000-20,000ft, the Spitfires wouldnt !
In a classic Dogfight, I would rather be in a Zero than in a Spitfire But if the enemy pilot knows and utilizes the Hit and Run tactics supurbly, then I would much rather be sitting in a Spitfire
One of the more noticable weaknesses of the early Zero's, was that its engine would cut out in a dive. However later on when the A6M3 arrived this weakness had been corrected, along with other weaknesses such as pilots protection. But the Zero nomatter what model, would still fall apart relatively quickly if hit by a good spray of 50.cal's
Overall taking tactics into consideration, the Spitfire is the superior aircraft, as long as it didnt get into a Turn and burn dogfight with the Zero at an altitude below 16,000ft
We won airsuperiorty over the Japanees because we refused to play their game, and completely changed the rules of the game to our advantage.
We beat the Zero by completely changing the rules of the game. Sure if we would have continued to dogfight the damn thing, all of our fighters would have been blown out of the sky. But we learned quickly enough not to play their game. No Zero pilot could afford to make even one mistake. He would not survive it for the most part! Naval and Marine Corps history is full of instances where Grumman "Cats" or Vought Corsairs returned to their carriers or fields shot full of holes and with the armor plate dented from numerous slugs. No Zero pilot ever returned in that condition.
After the thach weave tactic was utilized by U.S. and RAAF pilots, the Zero's days were severely numbered, and it was this tactic that rendered the Zero almost obsolete
But in some ways the Spitfire was inferior to the Zero, like in a Turning dogfight at 300mph
But unlike the Zero, the Spitfire wouldnt fall apart almost immediately after being hit by a good spray of 50.cal's Also the Zero's maneuverability would suffer somewhere between 15,000-20,000ft, the Spitfires wouldnt !
In a classic Dogfight, I would rather be in a Zero than in a Spitfire
But if the enemy pilot knows and utilizes the Hit and Run tactics supurbly, then I would much rather be sitting in a Spitfire One of the more noticable weaknesses of the early Zero's, was that its engine would cut out in a dive. However later on when the A6M3 arrived this weakness had been corrected, along with other weaknesses such as pilots protection. But the Zero nomatter what model, would still fall apart relatively quickly if hit by a good spray of 50.cal's
Overall taking tactics into consideration, the Spitfire is the superior aircraft, as long as it didnt get into a Turn and burn dogfight with the Zero at an altitude below 16,000ft
We won airsuperiorty over the Japanees because we refused to play their game, and completely changed the rules of the game to our advantage.
We beat the Zero by completely changing the rules of the game. Sure if we would have continued to dogfight the damn thing, all of our fighters would have been blown out of the sky. But we learned quickly enough not to play their game. No Zero pilot could afford to make even one mistake. He would not survive it for the most part! Naval and Marine Corps history is full of instances where Grumman "Cats" or Vought Corsairs returned to their carriers or fields shot full of holes and with the armor plate dented from numerous slugs. No Zero pilot ever returned in that condition.
After the thach weave tactic was utilized by U.S. and RAAF pilots, the Zero's days were severely numbered, and it was this tactic that rendered the Zero almost obsolete
The Spitfire could dogfight with the Zero, just not at low speeds below 300 mph. The Spitfire would just keep itself at high speeds, and was a better diver and roller.
The Spitfire was a faster plane, that kept it at a faster dogfighting pace. The only way the Zero could beat the Spitfire is by somehow, making it low and slow. If the Spitfire got low and slow, then the pilot made a stupid mistake.
The altitude didn't matter, as long as the Spitfire kept its pace which it normally would.
The Spitfire was a faster plane, that kept it at a faster dogfighting pace. The only way the Zero could beat the Spitfire is by somehow, making it low and slow. If the Spitfire got low and slow, then the pilot made a stupid mistake.
The altitude didn't matter, as long as the Spitfire kept its pace which it normally would.
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
Anyone seen a dogfight? The dogs stay real close to each other and go round and round.
T&B is a dogfight; B&Z is not. (imho)
T&B is a dogfight; B&Z is not. (imho)
Dogfight is a fight between two aircraft, the pilots can do whatever they need to do but it's still a dogfight. Or do you think as soon as a plane rolls, it's not a dogfight anymore?
The Spitfire is a better turner than the Zero at high speeds, anyway.
The Spitfire is a better turner than the Zero at high speeds, anyway.
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
The use of the term dogfight in WW2 is not a true dogfight as originally used to describe early air combat in WW1.
It is a misnomer to call WW2 air combat a dogfight.
It is a misnomer to call WW2 air combat a dogfight.
Lets say a Spitfire comes racing towards the Zero head-on at lets say 350mph and the Zero at 310mph. When they meet each other, they are either going to climb or make a sharp turn ! The second the Spitfire either climbs or turns it looses about 40-50mph, wich brings it down to 310mph were it is equal in turning ability to the Zero. But the spitfire keeps on turning to get behind the Zero, as it so happily was able to do against the luftwaffe in the ETO. But by keeping on turning the spitfire looses more speed yet, but the Zero doesnt loose as much speed because of its low wing loading and good acceleration, so now the table has turned. And it wont be long before the Zero is on the Spitfire's tail.
Now you would think that the pilot flying the Spitfire was stupid to try and engage in such a close dogfight with the Zero. But he wasnt, infact he was most likely an 'Ace' from the ETO who was use to happily outturn his Lufwaffe counterparts most of the time. Had the RAAF pilots listened to Joe Foss who, at request of the RAAF, flew the Spitfire and tried to lecture them on how to fight the Zero, then these kinds of incidents most likely wouldnt have happened.
Now you would think that the pilot flying the Spitfire was stupid to try and engage in such a close dogfight with the Zero. But he wasnt, infact he was most likely an 'Ace' from the ETO who was use to happily outturn his Lufwaffe counterparts most of the time. Had the RAAF pilots listened to Joe Foss who, at request of the RAAF, flew the Spitfire and tried to lecture them on how to fight the Zero, then these kinds of incidents most likely wouldnt have happened.
The Zero would lose speed too, and if the Spitfire has climbed the only way the Zero would be able to go with it is if the Zero climbed too. If the Spitfire climbed and the Zero turned, he's put himself below the Spitfire and the Spitfire can dive to speed up to get on him.
The Zero climbs and the Spitfire turns, he's not going to slow down and he's definately not going to just keeping going around in circles. If the Zero and Spitfire somehow meet head on, at the Zeros optimum speed then the Spitfire is just able to carry on at 340mph, and beat the Zero because above 300 the Zero was nothing special, in fact it was inferior to most things out there.
Plus, if they're getting into a turning fight at 310 mph the Japanese pilot has to be inhumanely strong to pull the Zero into its tight turns.
The Zero climbs and the Spitfire turns, he's not going to slow down and he's definately not going to just keeping going around in circles. If the Zero and Spitfire somehow meet head on, at the Zeros optimum speed then the Spitfire is just able to carry on at 340mph, and beat the Zero because above 300 the Zero was nothing special, in fact it was inferior to most things out there.
Plus, if they're getting into a turning fight at 310 mph the Japanese pilot has to be inhumanely strong to pull the Zero into its tight turns.
The moment you climb or turn your Spitfire you will reduce its speed dramaticly with about 40-50mph, the Zero would with about 30-35mph. But it didnt matter for the Zero as it was at its max performance at 275mph and it could gain speed quickly because of its nimbleness. And at 310mph the Zero can also pull tight turns but not as tight as at 301mph, wich is the Max limit for a ultra tight turn for a Zero if you dont want risk your plane ! However the Spitfire pilot will almost by instinct still try to get behind the Zero, because he is unaware of the Zero's abilities at speeds from 300mph and downwards. The Spitfire pilot is used to ETO dogfight's, wich is going to be his downfall.
But if the Spitfire pilots uses the new Hit and run tactics wich the RAAF pilots would later on, he will most likely prevail against the Zero. As long as he is careful about the altitude and doesnt get into a European style dogfight with the Zero !
But if the Spitfire pilots uses the new Hit and run tactics wich the RAAF pilots would later on, he will most likely prevail against the Zero. As long as he is careful about the altitude and doesnt get into a European style dogfight with the Zero !
There were RAF pilots flying Hurricanes and Buffalos from the start, which got transfered to Spitfires.
You can dive from 15,000 feet, so the Spitfire could escape easily if a Zero managed to get on its tail. Plus, at 300 mph the Zero pilot would have to be pulling extremely hard on the stick to get it to turn. It's roll rate would be stupidly bad, and the engine tended to cut out under negative Gs. The Spitfire would have to be brought down to a stupid low level, like below 5000 feet.
You can dive from 15,000 feet, so the Spitfire could escape easily if a Zero managed to get on its tail. Plus, at 300 mph the Zero pilot would have to be pulling extremely hard on the stick to get it to turn. It's roll rate would be stupidly bad, and the engine tended to cut out under negative Gs. The Spitfire would have to be brought down to a stupid low level, like below 5000 feet.
As i also explained before, after the Zero model A6M3 the problem with the engine cutting out in negative G's was corrected, and the wings and ailerons were strengthened. And yes at 300mph it would take a little more strenght to turn 'hard' because of its big ailerons ! But because they were big also ment that it didnt take much pulling back in the stick before it would turn very hard, so it wasnt such a big problem ! (But at over 305mph or so, if you pulled back your stick far enough for a ultra turn, you aircraft was at serius risk !)
The force on those barn doors, known as ailerons on the Zero, would have been huge when it was turning at 300. To get it to turn tightly the pilot would have to have amazing strength, and then the tighter the turn, the more force which does as you said, put risk on the aircraft falling to bits, but also puts more strain on the pilot AND takes away concentration from the pilot. The pilot would be fighting the aircraft more than the Spitfire, whereas the Spitfire pilot is having an easy time to turn his aircraft and can concentrate on everything.
He doesnt have to have amazing strength to turn the Zero tightly at 300mph ! That did infact not take to much strength at all ! But only 5-10 more mph and you would really feel the controls getting hard, and you would ultimately loose concentration !
The Zero would turn tighter than the Spitfire at 300mph, but the Spitfire would roll faster ! and at 310mph they would both turn equally tight, although if the Zero pilot pulled with all his strength risking his aircraft and concentration could outturn the Spitfire even at that speed ! But at 310mph the roll of the Zero wouldnt be good anymore and it is about this speed where the spit gets the advantage !
Overall the Spitfire is the better plane because it had the ability to adapt to Hit and run tactics. Had the Spitfire pilots stayed with the ETO dogfighting methods in the PT then they would have lost severely !
The Zero would turn tighter than the Spitfire at 300mph, but the Spitfire would roll faster ! and at 310mph they would both turn equally tight, although if the Zero pilot pulled with all his strength risking his aircraft and concentration could outturn the Spitfire even at that speed ! But at 310mph the roll of the Zero wouldnt be good anymore and it is about this speed where the spit gets the advantage !
Overall the Spitfire is the better plane because it had the ability to adapt to Hit and run tactics. Had the Spitfire pilots stayed with the ETO dogfighting methods in the PT then they would have lost severely !
evangilder
"Shooter"
The controls on a zero got very stiff at 275 MPH. This was documented by the pilots that tested the captured Zeroes.
See, evan knows what he's on about, the Zero could not turn with a Spitfire at speeds around and above 300 mph because the pilot wouldn't be able to force it. And if he did, it would fall apart.
What good is making the Zero turn really tight, if while you're fighting the plane the Spitfire has got away without you noticing.
What good is making the Zero turn really tight, if while you're fighting the plane the Spitfire has got away without you noticing.
Not according to Saburo Sakai who flew it and knew its limits !
His only complaint was it would roll faster to the left than right. But that it was able pull tightly at even 300mph. But he wouldnt pull 'extreem' turns at over 300mph !
And somewhere between 15,000-20,000ft it would loose its maneuverability to an extent where it would almost not be able to roll !
His only complaint was it would roll faster to the left than right. But that it was able pull tightly at even 300mph. But he wouldnt pull 'extreem' turns at over 300mph !
And somewhere between 15,000-20,000ft it would loose its maneuverability to an extent where it would almost not be able to roll !
Of course he's going to say it was almost perfect. The fact is, the Zero would not turn effectively at 300 + mph because the pilot would be fighting the plane, probably beyond what any normal pilot could achieve.
And take into account that he stated he would NOT pull extreme turns at 300 + mph...
...the Zero isn't going to be pulling any turns inside the Spitfire, because the pilot isn't going to risk it.
At anywhere above 5000 feet, the Spitfire could always easily just dive away from the Zero.
As it has been said before, the Zero has more disadvantages than advantages. It's only real chance in a fight is low and slow combat. The Spitfire coming in at 300 plus miles per hour isn't going to be in a lot of trouble, unless by a fatal error he puts himself below diving height and at low speeds.
And take into account that he stated he would NOT pull extreme turns at 300 + mph...
...the Zero isn't going to be pulling any turns inside the Spitfire, because the pilot isn't going to risk it.
At anywhere above 5000 feet, the Spitfire could always easily just dive away from the Zero.
As it has been said before, the Zero has more disadvantages than advantages. It's only real chance in a fight is low and slow combat. The Spitfire coming in at 300 plus miles per hour isn't going to be in a lot of trouble, unless by a fatal error he puts himself below diving height and at low speeds.
I find his testimony more reliable than U.S. tests with an damaged A6M2 ! The U.S. couldnt affort to loose it so they didnt push it to its extreems !
Yes it will ! but it most likely would not try at over 300mph ! Saburo Sakai would have no problem turning inside any allied aircraft at 300mph ! But he wouldnt attempt at over 300mph, at 300mph was OK but not any further for your own sake !. (At least thats how it was with the A6M2)
No because the A6M3-5-7's engine wouldnt cut out !
300mph isnt low speed !
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
