How good was Japanese aviation?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Chiron, Feb 20, 2005.

  1. Chiron

    Chiron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    Hey, sometimes, or maybe often I heard Japanese were (are) simply copy cats; their technology were simply derived largely from others (German) and with little mdification. Of course, this is simply a mix of superfical and of racial discrimination toward Asians. We all know that Chinese were the most technological civilization on Earth for almost 2000 years (CIA World Fact Book), and westerners copied lots of most fundamenal stuffs from all of neighbors.....

    Anyway, did Japan develop any outstanding aircraft (other than the famous Zero) that rival European most sophisticated fighter/bomber???
     
  2. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    The Ki-84 Frank and N1K2-J Shiden were fantastic fighters and rivaled some of the very best American planes...Ill have a look for some info on them for you...
     
  3. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    The Japanese had the same sort of doctrine as the Italians, range and manouverability were the attributes needed, the armament in the early part of the pacific war was terrible (2x12.7mm) and they had no self-sealing fuel tanks or any armour
     
  4. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England

    www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org
     

    Attached Files:

  5. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    their bomber's weren't up to much though............
     
  6. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Nah...they had some good early war dive bombers like the Val though. The G4M Betty was probably their best bomber, but it was hugely underarmed.
     
  7. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    Again, long range was everything so they had no armour and hardly any defensive armament. Bomb load wasn't too good either
     
  8. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    mind you they didn't exactly need a big heavy bomber, well not until the end of the war anyway.........
     
  9. toffigd

    toffigd Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Gdansk, PL
    Did anyone noticed, that G4M Betty had a fuselage much wider than other double-engined bombers? And I think bomb load wasn't such bad.
    But I must agree that most of early war Jap planes were very easy to make a torch of them.
     
  10. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    couple of .50s in the fuel tanks and there we go
     
  11. JCS

    JCS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    United States Marine
    Location:
    Nicholson, PA
    Actually the Mitsubishi Ki67 Hiryu was considered best from what I've seen...

    [​IMG]
     
  12. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Japaness had great Fighters :!:, but they were designed souly to dogfight, and not to be able to come home full of holes !

    The Japanees never build a decent bomber ! The bombers they did build, had poor payload and were notoriously weak ! The six 50.cal's on a Hellcat would litterally "Rip" a betty bomber apart :!:
     
  13. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Ah thanks for that JCS, as you can see im not up on me Jap bombers :oops:
     
  14. Chiron

    Chiron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student
    By the way, I heard that during the last stage of war, Japan was acutally developing their own nuclear bomb. Americans actually destoryed a ship that carried enriched nuclear materials.
     
  15. DaveB.inVa

    DaveB.inVa Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer
    This bad boy was supposed to be under development at the end of the war!
    Its the Nakajima G10N1 Fugaku (Mount Fuji). It never got off the drawing board though.

    The Japanese did have at least one 4 engined heavy bomber during the whole war! It was the Nakajima G5N1 Shinzan (Mountain Recess). There were 6 built in the 40 or 41. They were configured to be heavy bombers but served the entire time as transports!!

    They also ended up building the Nakajima G8N Renzan (Mountain Range) ... Yep they liked to name stuff after mountains!!! There were four built and the first flight was in 1944.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    That Fugaku looks neat! 8)
     
  17. wmaxt

    wmaxt Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer/Retired
    Location:
    Boise, Idaho
    The Japanese had three major problems during the war:
    1) Very few natural recources.
    2) The Samuri belief that the man made/won the fight not the tools.
    3) They were not prepared/intended to/able to fight a prolonged all out war with anyone in a position to fight back.

    To fight/win a major war a nation must, have the recources, will, and the stubornness to see it through. Just hoping they will give up if you give them a bloody nose the first day is unrealistic. But they did. In every major war since the 1850s the aggressor has failed to take a realistic view of their opponents capabilities or their aliances and make preperations to deal properly with them.

    Those are cool pictures, are there any specs. to go with them?
     
  18. DaveB.inVa

    DaveB.inVa Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer
    Lets see. The G5N Sinzan:

    Powerplant:

    Four Nakajima NK7A Mamoru 11 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radials rated at 1,870 hp for take-off, 1,750 hp at 1,400 m and 1,600 hp at 4,900 m, driving four-blade constant-speed propellers (G5N1).
    Four Mitsubishi Kasei 12 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radials rated at 1,530 hp for take-off, 1,480 hp at 2,200 m and 1,380 hp at 4,100 m, driving four-blade constant-speed propellers (G5N2).

    Armament:
    20 mm Type 99 Model 1 cannon in the dorsal and tail turrets and one 7.7 mm Type 97 machine-gun in each of the nose, ventral port and starboard beam positions.
    Bomb-load: normal 4400 lbs, maximum 8800 lbs

    Max speed 260 mph @ 13,500ft
    Cruise 230 mph @ 13,000ft

    Ceiling 24,500 ft
    Range 2,300 nautical miles

    Max takeoff weight 70,400 lbs


    For the Renzan:
    4 x Nakajima NK9K-L "Homare-24" at 2000 hp
    Max speed 367 mph
    Cruise 240 mph
    Ceiling 33500 ft
    Range 2500 miles
    Armament 6 x 20mm cannons, 4 x 12.7mm MGs, 2200-8800lbs of bombs


    Fugaku:
    Powerplant: six Nakajima Ha-54 4-row 36-cylinder air-cooled radials, 5000hp
    Max weight 269000 lbs
    Max speed 485 mph <== I dont know if this is correct
    Ceiling 50000 ft
    Range 12000 miles
    Armament 4 × 20mm cannon, 44000lbs of bombs
    Glad that thing wasnt built!!!
     

    Attached Files:

  19. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Bloody hell that Fugaku has some good stats!
     
  20. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    i seriously doubt it could pull them stats off though...........
     
Loading...

Share This Page