Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yes and your point? When the 2 met it was the Zero that usually met it's fate to the ratio of 19 to 1.The 300 miles is combat radius I am afraid but still is small deviation. I checked some detail, most of them denoted Mitsubishi Zero has almost over 2000km range.
The 300 miles is combat radius I am afraid but still is small deviation. I checked some detail, most of them denoted Mitsubishi Zero has almost over 2000km range.
Per USN stats F6F's claimed 114 Ki-84's for 12 losses. Besides being just claims there was frequent mis-id of J planes, some of those losses for example can be seen to have been in combats with N1K1J Georges (see below). But it wasn't easy for the Ki-84's. Of course we'll say "pilots" but the problem always is we can't quantify the effect of pilots. In theory paper statistics would determine the capability of "plane minus pilot" but their predictive power is doubtful IMO even if they are completely accurate. There were many intangibles of "plane" beyond just a few stats like speed and wing loading.Regarding the F6F vs Ki-84 scenario - The Hayate takes the price easily. A more equal match to the Hayate would be the F4U-4 Corsair, now that would be an interesting fight to watch !
re; flyboyj : "Yes and your point? When the 2 met it was the Zero that usually met it's fate to the ratio of 19 to 1."
Not to sound like a broken record but 19:1 is a claim not a real result. And, it includes all F6F opponents, fighter and non. In 1944-45 F6F's claimed almost 16:1 just against fighter types, but many of those were kamikazes.
Combining both responses, the Japanese Navy 343rd Air Group, flying the N1K1J George, a roughly comparable plane to the Ki-84, went about 1:3 v. US fighters in 1945 in real results (it met F6F's, F4U's, P-47's and P-51's).
Joe
Again the point is we can't say the number of real kills was actually 79, or what it was. It's just a bad historical habit to take claims at face value. In that case it's obvious the P-47N's were successful, any likely discounting of the claim number is still a lot more than 1 loss.By June 1, 1945, the 318th, with its P-47N's, had racked up a 79 to 1 kill ratio. Certainly they weren't all George's, but you get the point.
Or against the Ki-83, Ki-201, Ki-202 and the J7W Shinden...
![]()
None yet ready for production in 1945 but then again, I don't immediately see a P-80 flying missions over Japan...
Kris
The Soviets claimed 650 F-86s over Korea - 660 actually rotated through from 1950 - 1953. That means the Russian shot down all but 10 F-86s....Even the same plane looked at from two sides. My personal favorite, that's inspired me to research it, is MiG-15 v F-86 in Korea; 10:1 according to the US side, 3:1 according to the Soviets, *in the opposite direction*. If you take the approach, "oh well you can poke holes in anything but...let's just ignore that and use the claims" you get opposite results. One of those numbers has to be wrong, and of course in reality both are.
Henry Sakaida's book "Genda's Blade". He matched up the 343rd's combat accounts with those in US records, and that was the approximate total result. Naturally it was more favorable to the 343rd just based on their claims and losses; and more favorable to their US opponents just based on *their* claims and losses.Japanese Navy 343rd Air Group, about 1:3 v. US fighters in 1945 in real results[/I]."
Since we are on the subject of nitpicking, if "real" is intended to mean actual or otherwise accurate, where exactly was this figure compiled from if not from inherently unreliable claims?
It's really nothing to do with working on planes or knowing pilots to calculate the ratio, but a matter of what the real losses were on each side. My point is you can't use 10:1 as innumerable books and articles have, you can't use 2-3:1 in MiG's favor, as many Russian books and articles do. What's the right number? you need the real losses for each side.As I posted earlier, do the math - even with the skewed numbers included and including F-86 losses from "all causes" there is still at least a 4 to 1 kill ratio for the Saber when you include the Koreans and the Chinese. The Russians like to separate themselves from their Korean and Chinese comrades so we will never know what the real USAF F-86 vs USSR MiG-15 kill ratio was but having worked on both aircraft and in speaking to pilots who flew both aircraft I would firmly believe the F-86 walked away the victor.
As far as WW2 - we all know the ratios are higher than history ultimately revealed to us, but then net result was still the same...