Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Zero was not that lightly constructed. From here:
This weight-saving design would indicate that the craft is flimsily built but such is not the case, for its strength compares favorably with many American-built planes.
Every possible weight-saving measure was incorporated into the design. Most of the aircraft was built of a new top-secret 7075 aluminium alloy developed by Sumitomo Metal Industries in 1936. Called Extra Super Duralumin (ESD), it was lighter and stronger than other alloys (e.g. 24S alloy) used at the time, but was more brittle and prone to corrosion[6] which was countered with an anti-corrosion coating applied after fabrication.
It was VERY airworthy and stronger at the ultimate load factor than many western designs, including the Hellcat. It could not take nearly as much battle damage, ....
I know this thread is about which was better, Hellcat or Spitfire, but the Hellcat's kill ratio against the Zero and other planes seems to be part of the Hellcat's calling card.
I think everyone acknowledges that the Hellcat had the advantage of better pilots against the Japanese pilots.
Actually, I meant to say the Hellcat victories, which included kamakazes, did NOT include kamakazes they didn't shoot down themselves. That is, the Hellcat did not get credit for kamakazes that were lost to other than Hellcats.
To me, a V-1 is not an aerial victory. The target is unmaneuvering and defenseless.
At least a kanakaze could try to avoid being shot dow, WAS an airborne manned aircraft, and probably was faster than a combat type since it probably had much equipment removed. It was important to shoot down V-1's and there should be a V-1 category for some recognition, but it was NOT an aerial victory in the classic sense of the word.
Classically an aerial victory was a victory over an airborne, manned enemy aircraft that could reasonably be expected to be armed in the vicinity of a combat area. That leaves out V-1's and ground kills, though they would merit a separate category.
I'm sure the recognition of ground kills and V-w's was due to the local commanders wanting to keep up morale in their squadrons when such kills werre getting to be more frequent. Nevertheless, it goes against all recognition prior to late WWII.
I dont know if they (V1s) were awarded as victories in the same way as a combat aircraft, however from what I read about the early days of the Zeppelins shooting one down was a very very difficult thing. They had defensive fire and you had to get so close there was a real danger of hitting it.A dirigible is a manned airborne aircraft that was armed. Sometimes so was a spotting balloon, though sometimes also not armed. I would award the dirigible, but not the balloon. At least the poor balloon spotter could be winched down and probably live. Not so the dirigible.
And I still would not award an aerial victory for a V-1. no matter what. We are just coming into a time when unlanned, armed combat aircraft are being deployed and they might very well should be a victory since they are defending themselves and even attacking on their own, but an unmanned reconnaissance drone? No way. If they start awarding those, it's just trying to make themselves look good.
And I still would not award an aerial victory for a V-1. no matter what.
At least a kanakaze could try to avoid being shot dow, WAS an airborne manned aircraft, and probably was faster than a combat type since it probably had much equipment removed.
I think you would have to, Squadron Leader Joseph Berry of No. 501 (Tempest) Squadron, shot down 59 V-1s, and Wing Commander Beamont destroyed 31....it is still an example of skill that should be recognized, other pilots just couldnt do it.I'm pretty certain the RAF treated V-1 "kills" as a category separate from air-to-air kills against manned aircraft. In "Aces High", the compendium of aces from the Commonwealth air arms, the "Diver" aces were only included in the second volume which included additions/corrections to the first volume, the "Diver" aces being grouped in their own section. This suggests (to me, at least) that V-1 kills were not grouped together with other air-to-air victories by the Commonwealth air forces.
GregP rightly identifies radar and radio comms as vital contributing factors to the Hellcat's success. According to Layton's "And I Was There", we should also add signals intelligence from tactical interception of radio comms from Japanese formation leads. Apparently, this was a major contribution to the Marianas Turkey Shoot.