Well, the discussion so far was based on what I understood was the main period opposition and the principal Jap fighter which hacked down the Vilderbeestes (though please correct if this earlier assumption is wrong.
Havent read the full thread, however over malaya there were no A5Ms (Claudes) deployed. The only Claudes I know of that were deployed were a few attached to Carrier Zuiho at the beginning of the war in the PI operations, and possibly a few at kwaj. AFAIK there were no Claudes in these areas. Against the poms in Malaya, the following types listed in numerical order of importance may have been present at some time or other
1) Ki27 Nate
2) Ki 43 Oscar
3) A6M Zero (and some doubt by some about that)
4) Ki44 Tojo (maybe, but even if so as prototypes only).
109s WERE armoured by the time of BoB, were they not?
It was being introduced from July. The main combats against the Defiants were over France some time earlier, and not all 109s were armoured by the time of the BoB.
Looks again at the performance figures and then consider the engagement scenario. The failure of the Hurricanes against Japanese opposition came largely due to the fact that the Hurri didn't have a compelling tactical advantage - it had a little speed over the opposition - but that was basically it.
They had a firepower advantage, and a dive advantage. The Japanese relied mostly on their Oscars to demolish the Hurricanes, which had very nearly the same speed as the Hurris. Incidentally the most common types of Hurris in late'41, early '432 were not the new Hurri II, they were still relying on clapped out Hurri Is. I dont know what the actual performance of these fighters were, but in '44, the long continuous offensive by the USN did not give their carrier wings any opprtunity to re-supply with new engines and the like. Consequently, the Americans were flying aircraft tyhat whilst theoretically were able to fly 370 mph, were actually just able to make 350mph. I would be surprised if the Hurris shipped out to the pacific were abale to fly faster than the oscars opposing them.
It couldn't out-turn (though the pilots up to Singapore didn't realise that) - and due to its thick wing, couldn't dive away either, meaning pilots couldn't adopt zoom and boom tactics like the P40s. (see accounts in Hurricane the Last Witness by Brian Milton and Hurricanes in Sumatra by Terrence Kelly)
Ive read those accounts, but I dont fully buy it. Over Burma, whilst the japanese still bested the later marks of hurricane (a somewhat unfair comparison, since by then, Hurricanes were being used as ground attack aircraft), Hurricanes did use diving as a means of outrunning Japanese aircraft.
All a Defiant has to do is trundle at close to its best speed and tempt the Japanese on - which, given their tactical doctrine, is probably what they would have done. As you know from the 'heroic exceptions' - Defiants did great execution - even against 109s - when attacked from the rear quarter.
One of the best ways of getting your a/c shot out from under you is to "trundle along" in a straight predictable speed. And thats basically what a definat had to do with the armament it was carrying. In the Pacific, with tropical conditions, it is not going to exceed 300mph IMO. And it will not be going flat knacker when jumped by Japanese fighters. And the Japanese pilots at that stage of the war displayed exceptional initiative and skill. Plus they studied the outcomes of battles in Europe with a great deal of interest. if the Definat was deployed into the TO in any numbers, you cannot count on the japanese not being aware of how to deal with it. Rule number 1 in combat. Assume your opponent knows all about your mount, and will fly to the best possible advantage
Against a much slower, much more lightly constructed A5m, which has much lower fire-power to boot, I have no doubt they would have done even better... ESPECIALLY when the A5m has no speed advantage to force the belly or head-on attacks used later by the 109s.
Im not sure why a comparison between the by then obsolescent claudes and the still in production Defiants is all that valid. Not sure the RAF would risk Defiants in daylight combat again anyway, when the Defiants niche was as a NF anyway. Against the Defiant it was far more likley that it would encounter Oscars which did by far the lions share of fighting over Malaya (at least in an offensive role), and possibly against Nates. Hurricaners even struggled against Nates. If the Nates are flying defensively, that will mean the Defiants are flying escort, and that means they will be tied to 150 mph bombers. If I were the Japanese, knowing I was flying against Defiants, and knowing its weknesses, I would direct my Nates to attempt to engage from below......get the height, then dive to a point below and finally engage the formation in a rapid climbing fight.
109s had a 50mph+ speed advantage over Defiants. In our scenario here, Definats would appear to have an up to 50mph advantage over the A5m - and even if this performance was eroded by the fitting of Vokes filters etc, they would still have a significant speed advantage,
Nope, not necessarily. In a defensive fighter only situation, the Definats might have a 15-30mph disadavantage compared to the Oscar. In an offensive role, the Defiant would be tied to an escort role, meaning it might have a 100-150 mph disadvantage against a fast moving Nate. if the Nate had the altitude advantage, the speed advantage might be closer to 200mph
So, the Defiant has the option of the dive which the Hurricane doesn't (as you can bet your bottom dollar that the weighty beast IS going to dive well) - and the opposition we're considering here has no speed advantage either. Given that it isn't going to even attempt a turning fight (why would a turret fighter even try to?!) it might actually seem to have some advantages.
Hardly, in comparison to th hurricane. Therere were good reasons why the Defiant was withdrawn from daylight operations, and the Hurri was not. Nothing would be substantially different in the Pacific.
It would certainly have been a better option than Buffalos - and perhaps even in this environment, than Hurricanes.
Buffnut would disagree with you on that.....Buffaloes I was surprised to learn actually did quite well considering the difficulties they were placed under. I dont see any different outcome arising from the deployment of a Defiant inplace of say Hurricanes and Buffaloes> The allies were not defeated because of their equipment. They were defeated because of other factors.
I'm not saying they would have ruled the skies by any exception - trundling along and downing attackers is NOT the same as winning air superiority, but they could have been a potentially difficult tactical proposition for period Japanese fighters.
If they were, they would have been the only Allied fighters apart from the F4F that was able to do that. a tall ask indeed.
Of course, if doctrine would allow them, the best option would have been for Japanese pilots to ignore them
.
Nope the best option for the Japanese would be to shoot them down, as they did with just about every allied aircraft type at that time