How was the Japanese evaluation of the P-40?

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

Wow Shinpachi, thank you very much!

I'm fascinating by understanding why mistakes were made (or at least what one belives could be mistakes) in aircraft development. And one of the things that I really would like to understand about the Japanese aircraft industry during the war is why it took so long for the airframes of planes like the Ki-43 and the Zero to receive more powerful engines (in the case of the Zero, the A6M8 specially, did not even entered in production AFAIK). As for the Ki-43, I have read the model 3 could reach a maximum speed of 358mph in a version Tachikawa started to produce in 1944. This would be adequate for 1942, but not for 1944. If it's power curve was comparable to a P-40E in different altitudes, and it could have been avaliable earlier, than the IJA would have had a plane that would be able to easily hunt a 1942 P-40 in level flight. Something I belive it wasn't so simple with the first model of the Type 1 fighter, which I guess it was slower than contemporary British Hurricane.

Certainly one must not underestimate the capabilities of the design teams and the military. They must have had their reasons to not put those engines, even if mistakes were commited in the process. And understanding those reasons in a perspective that really makes sense is what matters in the study of history.
 
Last edited:
Denniss said:
JG 10x were school units - were they really used in combat ?
Click to expand...
Yes, they did.
A good example would be the intercept of 85 B-17s on 4 April 1943 when Maj. Oesau led both I/JG2 and the operational staff of JG105 into the battle near Rouen.

Shinpachi said:
Thank you very much for your kind advice, Shortround6, which encouraged me for more research.
The F4U and the F6F were introduced to the Japanese aviation enthusiasts in 1944.
Click to expand...
Fantastic information, Shinpachi!

I also find it interesting that those lists show the B-19 but not the B-18. Also shown on the list is the XF5F and F7F - and I sure would be interested to see what the Japanese had written down for the P-59!
 
I saw the B-23, which is interesting, because the few B-23 types that were produced, were used to patrol the west coast and never saw combat, while the B-18A was actually in combat areas, like the Philippines and at Pearl Harbor.

Many of the B-18s in the Philippines were caught on the ground (along with several B-10 types, too) and you would think that the Japanese would have had those included on the list by designation, just like the XF5F was.

There is even a photo of a B-10 in Japanese markings, but I suspect that was a Dutch export version that was captured.
 
GrauGeist said:
I also find it interesting that those lists show the B-19 but not the B-18. Also shown on the list is the XF5F and F7F - and I sure would be interested to see what the Japanese had written down for the P-59!
Click to expand...

I'm glad you are interested, Dave.
The list says with the diagrams like these.

B-19 Douglas


XF5F-1 Grumman (Skyrocket)


F7F Grumman (Tomcat)


P-59 Bell (Airacomet)
 


No mistake, no defeat, Jenisch

Japanese mistakes were discussed a lot of times repeatedly in this forum.
If I may summarize,

1. Japanese did not notice the effectiveness of the hit-and-run tactics until it got popular in the world.
2. They did not understand the necessity of the armors as well as the importance of airmen's lives.
3. The navy and the army were not cooperative with the aircraft development each other and this caused fatal delay and inefficiency in the factory.
4. and many more.

I personally think, however, the basic mistake for the Japanese was that they had been so hard to imitate the western advanced technologies since 1868 that they had forgot to think what would be the best and unique for them by themselves. Recently I guess that Japanese should have promoted their unique bomb balloons more seriously and applied the psychological warfare more positively as they did in the Dutch Indochina to occupy all area with the minimum troops. Just my guess.
 
The Fu Go project did have it's merits and could have really been an effective weapon, but the Japanese didn't fully grasp how to use them to full effect.
Had they focused on incendiary bombs during the dry summer months and then high explosives during the winter months, the results may have been more in their favor.
 
Re: Shinpachi's post of Japanese evaluation of Allied aircraft, Where is this available and is there an English translation available as well?
 
Direct links to the archive.

敵機解剖 : 大東亜戦・鹵獲・撃墜撃破飛行機写真集
昭和18
朝日新聞社

Analysis of Enemy Planes - Captured and destroyed aircraft pictures in the Great East Asian War
published by Asahi Shinbunsya in 1943
国立国会図書館デジタルコレクション - 敵機解剖 : 大東亜戦・鹵獲・撃墜撃破飛行機写真集


敵機一覧
昭和19年版
読売新聞社

List of Enemy Planes
published by Yomiuri Shinbunsya in 1944
国立国会図書館デジタルコレクション - 敵機一覧. 昭和19年版


No English translation is available but the headline of the list I posted in #20 can be read like this.
 
Micdrow said:
Though I can't read Japanese this book that I have it does have a wide variety of pictures of different countries aircraft captured by the Japanese.

Very interesting information there Shinpachi. Many thanks.

View attachment 361783
Click to expand...

That's the book I have, too. I do wish it would be republished in English because it has some fantastic photos. I'd also prefer it to be in larger format and printed on better quality paper so the photos were clearer...but that's just me being greedy.
 
Shinpachi said:
Where there is a will, there is a way.
Performance list of the U.S. aircraft published in 1943.

View attachment 361354 View attachment 361355 View attachment 361356 View attachment 361357
Click to expand...

Thanks Shinpachi. I have those performance figures. What I'm looking for is a tactical comparison. I've seen a diagram depicting a Buffalo apparently doing a loop (or perhaps a steep-banked turn) with a Ki-43 on the inside gaining a firing solution. I'd really like to understand what that diagram is showing and any related comments regarding combat tactics that Japanese pilots derived from the evaluations of captured Allied aircraft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

How good a plane was the P-40, really?
23 24 25
Replies
493
Views
39K
Think Tanker
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
862
Ivan1GFP
I
A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
F
Just how good was the Mitsubishi F1M 'Pete'
Replies
12
Views
2K
cammerjeff
Effectiveness of the P-38
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
12K
Thumpalumpacus
Menu
Log in
Register