Corsair vs Zero

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Well, your mind is stupidly simple then. Because the slenderness of plane, how easily air flows over the aircraft, the strength of the aircraft, how far the elevators can be pulled, the engine torque, the speed...ALL have to be taken into account when making an aircraft turn.
 
Flight sim BS. My friend, you either only think you know how an airplane works or you are simply and deliberately obscurantist. When evidence is presented as to the high speed failure of the ailerons in the A6M design, from people (plural) who actually flew the damn thing, A6M2's and A6M5's, you launch off into a discussion of elevators. HOT FLASH! All these things must work in concert, ailerons, elevators, rudder in order to execute a turn. Must work in concert . . . that means all together and at the same time . . . get that part? Any failure of one of them means the entire maneuver fails. I doubt anyone will find any comments regarding A6M elevator performance as there wasn't much point in discussing a non-issue vis-a-vis the the lack of aileron control at high speed, i.e., if forces on the ailerons preclude a roll, then there is no turn and no point in worrying about what the elevators are or are not doing. Your elevator arguments are red herrings.

Let's see you come up with legitimate sources (hasn't that been asked before?) that confirm your theses. Not your opinion, mind you, but something concrete from someone, preferably with A6M flight experience, that supports you contentions. And something quotable, if you please, not just some vague reference. Just as you challenge for sources on elevators, I challenge you for sources in general. And if you can't produce them, since you believe any lack of sources in views opposing yours buttresses your position, then in the absence of your presenting sources, then, you, too, must be mistaken.

Rich
 
What i think has happened here judging from your rudeness ! is that there has been an missunderstanding.

Sure, Aileron and Elevator work in concert to make a turn: The aileron puts the plane into the right position to make the turn, afterwords the elevator takes over to pull the plane into a tight turn. Thats how it works !

What my arguement is all about, is that once the Zero has been put into position to turn, then NO allied aircraft can follow it, nomatter what speed.

Maby this is an unworthy advantage to mention, as the Zero cant make fast rolls at high speeds, i dont know.

Anyhow there's no need to get rude !

About the sources... they are the same as yours buddy ! Sanders report from 42 and The US Army Air Forces "Informational Intelligence Summary.
 
Sigh . . .

Your contention is/was the A6M could out turn the Spitfire and any other adversary at high speed.

All the evidence and experience points to an inability of the A6M to execute at roll at speeds in excess of 300 mph.

You continue to stipulate that this was untrue. Your source, please. And the intelligence reports, which I might add, I went to the trouble to transcribe, do not, at all, support your position. How about you find and transcribe something that does.

And you say
. . . once the Zero has been put into position to turn, then NO allied aircraft can follow it, nomatter what speed
Click to expand...

And I ask, just how does an A6M get in that postion to turn at high speed without aileron controlled roll? Your statement is a nonsequitur.

If you find the bald truth to be insulting or rude then there's not much I can do about that.

Rich
 
Sigh.....

I never questioned the fact that at over 300mph, the Zero wouldnt be able make fast rolls

However if the Zero already was in position to turn, meaning one of its wings were pointing downwards and then starts to turn, then there's nothing that can follow it The low wingloading will see to that
 
Actually, in a turn you do not just pull the stick back because the aircraft tends to drop. I don't know if you've ever seen an aircraft pull an extended turn, but the plane rocks up and down as the pilot corrects it with aileron moves.
 
Your absolutely correct However those small corrections in flight aint at all significant ! But your right nonetheless.
 
They actually make a lot of difference, plus you use your rudder.

Anyway, Rich is right. The Zero couldn't even get into position above 300 mph, and it's not going to be speeding up from 275 mph while banking.
 
Getting the wings into some position other than horizontal, i.e., roll, and for fast turning that requires close to vertical, is required to make a turn. If you can't get there in the first place, then there's no turn. You keep trying to put the aircraft into a position it cannot achieve in order to make some dubious point. At high speed, the A6M was not going to be able to initiate the roll necessary for a turn . . . no initiation, no turn. Therefore it could not be already in your supposed attitude to out turn anyone. And that, my friend, is the point. It simply couldn't do what you claim it could do. You can't magically have an A6M, wings vertical, at 300 mph and say, "okay, we'll start here." Further, I'd suggest that even if you could do that, you can probably kiss one or both wings good-bye . . . the airplane obviously wasn't built to handle that kind of stress. If it were, you'd be able to execute the meneuver from the beginning. Any you can't. QED.

Still waiting for your sources.

Rich
 
Haha !!

Are you litteraly saying the Zero couldnt roll at all at over 300mph ??

The sources ?? What do you need sources on ?? What claimes have i made that you need a source on ??
 
Soren said:
Haha !!

Are you litteraly saying the Zero couldnt roll at all at over 300mph ??

The sources ?? What do you need sources on ?? What claimes have i made that you need a source on ??
Click to expand...

The roll rate of the Zeke was the same as the Typhoons at 300mph IAS, ~42-43 deg/sec at 10,000ft.

At 340mph IAS, the roll rate was 35deg/sec. At that rate, over 10 seconds for a 360, it would classed as a 'slow roll' during show aerobatics.

Even the P-47C, which is not known for its roll rate, is ~2.2 times faster than that of the Zeke.

from NACA Report 868
 
Exactly !! It was slow, but it 'could' roll !!!

Thank you Kraz ! can I call you 'Kraz' ?
 
If at max speed it takes the A6M about five seconds to roll in to a turn, and it takes a Spitfire some two and a half seconds to execute the same maneuver at the same speed, which one is going to turn inside the other? And if the Spitfire, or F4U, or F6F or whatever can execute the maneuver at higher speeds than the A6M can even achieve, which one turns inside the other? So here's the A6M driver is trying to horse the poor baby around at 300 mph. I wonder how much of his attention is directed towards correcting a skid, watching for the insipient stall, and other sensory inputs caused by the airplane's remarkable (in the truest sense of the word, so bad that is is remarked upon) lack of performance in executing the maneuver. Could an A6M roll at 300 plus mph?

oh, s.u.r.e, .o. .n. .l. .y . . .v. . .e. . .r. . .y . . . .s. . . .l. . . .o. . . .w. . . .l. . . .y

in comparison to it's adversaries. Whoever reaches a firing solution first usually win. In high speed maneuvering the A6M was at a obvious, distinct, and noted disadvantage. Might even partially explain how in the last 12 months of the war F6F's were credited with downing some 1000 A6Ms in exchange for 75 losses, F4Us 327 A6M credits for 27 losses, and FMs 87 A6Ms for 2 losses.

Though I'd still like to see something beyond just your opinion, it is obviously not forthcoming.

Now, you don't agree with me; I don't agree with you; in all probability neither of us is going to change. I'm going to leave it at that and let others draw their own conclusions.

Regards,

Rich
 



Yeah you go ahead and believe in that !! Jesus christs !

If the Zero wants to lose a Spitfire on its tail at over 300mph, all the pilot has to do is to pull back the stick and the Spitfire will be gone in seconds.
 
Sure it will. Even then climb rate isn't the factor to this discussion, turn rate is. The Zero cannot get into turning position, so it cannot turn. End of story really, the Spitfire would be turning inside it because the Zero would barely be able to get there!
 
I'm going to leave it there, I think you put the whole discussion in it's place there Rich. You've quite a lot of knowledge stored up there, mate!
 
R Leonard said:
He obviously didn't read the part about Spitfires, A6Ms, and loops at high speed.
Click to expand...

And you obviously believe everything you read, as long as it strengthens your opinion

The Zero's loop would be of alot less diameter
 
And you obviously believe the crap you read if it strengthens your opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Sakai Saburo Vs Sugita Sho-ichi
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
4K
GrauGeist
S
Corsair
Replies
1
Views
785
tomo pauk
Supercharging & stuff - losses, improvements, good vs. bad. vs. excellent etc
2 3
Replies
44
Views
3K
Bretoal2
B
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
882
Ivan1GFP
I
Menu
Log in
Register