They could do that with their existing bombers, and generally do it with a heavier bomb load. The problem is that the bombers suffer when attacking without fighter escort, and the G4M and G3M were much more vulnerable to fighters than the Luftwaffe's bombers.
If Axis aircraft swap theater?
- Thread starter Nodeo-Franvier
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
They could do that with their existing bombers, and generally do it with a heavier bomb load. The problem is that the bombers suffer when attacking without fighter escort, and the G4M and G3M were much more vulnerable to fighters than the Luftwaffe's bombers.
No, total A6M2 flight trials didn't complete until July 1940.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The A6M2 went into service in July 1940 with the 12th Rengo Kokutai in China.
TheMadPenguin
Senior Airman
Type 93 (Destroyer/cruiser torp nicknamed LongLance by usa) In service 1933–1945
Type 95 (Submarine version of Type 93) would be in service starting 1935
The Pearl Harbor torpedo (type 91) was active since 1931.
Yeah, on 21 July 1940 with preproduction aircraft, post trials.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Yeah, those same aircraft (13 out of 15) saw combat within several weeks, too.
Admiral Beez
Major
If we stick to air forces rather than naval aircraft I'd say the Japanese will be pleased to get German aircraft. Yes, the attack from Formosa on the Philippines may not have single engine fighter escort, but it wasn't needed anyway, as that tool MacArthur left all his aircraft lined up on the airfields for quick, mostly unopposed destruction.
As for the rest, the IJAF didn't have a tactical dive bomber. The Stuka will do nicely in China, Malaya, Burma, DEI and PNG, especially against ground forces and coastal merchant shipping lacking any credible air cover. And let's see how the IJAF puts the Bordkanone 3.7 cm (1.46 in) underwing gun pods to use. The well armoured and armed Bf 109 and Fw 190 will be more than a match for the Buffaloes, Hawks, Warhawks, Wildcats and Hurricanes the allies rely on until 1943. By 1941 the Japanese have aerial intercept radar, with continuous improvement. And by 1944 the Me 262, Me 163 and Ta 152 will be killing unescorted day and nighttime B-29s by the dozen.
One major advantage the Japanese gain is aircraft radios that are resistant to interference. This was a huge problem with Japanese aircraft communications, hindering the ability to work as a team, Radio Systems in the Early A6M Zero
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
According to "Campbell" the type 91 was indeed active since 1931.
However the first(?) version was used by Nells in the attack on the Prince of Wales and Repulse.
Mod 2 was introduced in April of 1941 (?) and was used by Kates at Pearl Harbor and Bettys in the Prince of Wales/Repulse attack.
The Mod 3 dates to Oct of 1941 but was not used operationally until the latter part of 1942?
I have no idea if there were any minor improvements or how long some problems (if any) took to work out.
The early torpedo weighed 1728lbs with a 331lb charge while the Mod 3 went 1872lbs with a 529lb charge(?)
by the end of the war the type 91 mod 7 strong weighed 2319lbs (?)
It is only one source.
Th eUS MK 13 was "introduced" in 1936 and we know how that worked out
Shortround6
Major General
The Japanese had quite bit of trouble with the early Zeros with aileron and/or wing flutter, different combinations of trim tabs, internal weights, external weights. From May of 1941 production aircraft were fitted with heavier outer wing skins, some additional longitudinal stringers and added external weights to ailerons. Planes without these modifications were redlined at 250kts and limited to 5 G dive pull outs. The way the Japanese aero industry calculated possible flutter problems was revised.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,036
- Jun 25, 2013
The Japanese and German aircraft were both designed for their expected operational environments; neither the Luftwaffe nor the Japanese Naval or Army air services would be, overall, better with the other's aircraft, especially fighters, with a few exceptions. The German fighters wouldn't have the range to operate over the Pacific and the Japanese ones would (probably) suffer in the ETO, although it must be noted that several aircraft found lacking in the Pacific did much better in the ETO (especially the Easter Front) against German aircraft than they did against Japanese aircraft in the Pacific. Similarly, some aircraft that were successful in the ETO struggled in the Pacific.
Admiral Beez
Major
In the inverse, can we make this argument for the P-38? The Lightning prevailed in the PTO, but IDK about the ETO.
British fighters of 1941 would sweep Japanese fighters from the sky and yet we have a quote here that "most of squadron 81 Spitfire Mark VIII are unserviceable due to rippled skin and warped engine bearings" from facing those crappy old obsolete 2 gun KI43 Oscars. If Hurricanes and Spitfires were so much better than Japanese fighters why didn't they "sweep them from the sky" where they faced them in China Burma and India? The guy in the above quote certainly doesn't agree with British fighter superiority, or was the Mark I Hurricane and Mark I Spitfire superior to the Mark VIII Spitfire?
Admiral Beez
Major
There's nothing worth hitting beyond Coventry and the midlands. A couple of bombers hitting a sheep farm in Yorkshire isn't going to win the war. Creating chaos amongst the countryside people? Have you met a farmer, there is no chaos, our Yorkshire farmer will be pointing his blunderbuss skyward. Though I feel badly for our Polish friend here.
Last edited:
Admiral Beez
Major
That's an issue of pilot experience, training, doctrine. If we look at IJAF fighters, there are very few instances of any combat against the Hurricane or Spitfire. The former, hurriedly sent to Singapore and DEI without training or any organization, just as these territories were falling fared expectedly poorly.
It's a funny thing on this forum, there's a core group that hold onto a belief that Japanese fighters were superior to all comers. No Japanese fighter in wide service in 1940 (Ki-27 and A5M) can beat the Spitfire or Hurricane of 1940. There is a short window of 1941 to mid-1942 where the A6M and Ki-43 could hold their own, but the Spitfires of 1942-43 had their measure. By 1944 the Japanese finally closed the performance gap with the likes of the Nakajima Ki-84, but I'd not want to take on the latest Spitfire.
Last edited:
It's a funny thing on this forum, but there are several different core groups that hold onto similar beliefs about British, German and American fighters, too. Nobody's completely bias-free.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
ANY opponent of an A6M or KI-43 that got into a turning fight ran the risk of unfortunate consequences.
Doesn't matter if it was American, British or otherwise.
This is not favoritism, or fan-base. It is historical fact.
Even late war USN pilots in F4Us and F6Fs found this out the hard way...
Doesn't matter if it was American, British or otherwise.
This is not favoritism, or fan-base. It is historical fact.
Even late war USN pilots in F4Us and F6Fs found this out the hard way...
The Spitfire 8 is a beast of a performer especially in climb. I can't think of an American fighter id want to be in to actually fight a Spitfire 8, maybe a Mustang or P47M at 30,000 feet so I could run away, but to actually stay and fight I can't think of one .
The Japanese apparently found a way to deal with it by staging Ki43's from high altitude all the way to the ground so that boom and zoom tactics didn't work that great, no matter what altitude you pulled out at you were still in a swarm of Oscars. The KI43 also didn't suffer from reduced toll rate like a Zero did. We all know that above 300 mph or so a Zero could barely roll so he was fairly easy to evade. An Oscar could roll well at any speed so if he was on your tail firing he was extremely hard to shake off.
The Japanese apparently found a way to deal with it by staging Ki43's from high altitude all the way to the ground so that boom and zoom tactics didn't work that great, no matter what altitude you pulled out at you were still in a swarm of Oscars. The KI43 also didn't suffer from reduced toll rate like a Zero did. We all know that above 300 mph or so a Zero could barely roll so he was fairly easy to evade. An Oscar could roll well at any speed so if he was on your tail firing he was extremely hard to shake off.
Admiral Beez
Major
Well yes, but that's their one trick. They have a dangerous imbalance of firepower, agility and protection that guaranteed their obsolescence by the end of 1943, less than two years after the Oscar enters service. ANY opponent after the removal of rubbish like the Buffalo that avoids a turning fight with the A6M or Ki-43 has very good odds of either flaming the matchstick Japanese or fleeing the scene.
Imagine if the Spitfire of October 1941 (the year the Oscar entered service) was made like the Ki-43, without armour, without self sealing fuel tanks, with only two guns. Sure, it might be agile, but no one would be referring to the Spitfire as a superlative fighter when it can't destroy German bombers, and the Few are burned to death in their cockpits.
Luftwaffe flying Ki-43s in 1941-42 in ETO means that Beufighters have a free pass during the daylight, that Hurricane II and Spitfire V are viable fighters, along with P-39 and P-40. Boston III is very workable, too, so is the Mitchell and Marauder, all during the day.
Please name a single area where Hurricanes were able to handle a Zero or KI43? Never happened. Not one place. Everywhere Hurricanes encountered Zeros or KI43 you had pilots begging for Spitfires. Every single time. The Hawk 75 was a better platform against the KI43 than the Hurricane. Zeros manhandled Tropical Spit V's to the tune of 28-4 over Australia. It was embarrassing. Zeros flew 500 miles 1 way and ran Spitfires out of gas over their own territory and all Spitfire fans can do is make excuses. They flew a captured Zero against a Spitfire and determined "below 20,000 the spitfire has nothing on the Zero". This is from the 2 test pilots that actually flew the tests. So a guy who never flew a Zero in his life climbed into an unfamiliar fighter and whipped a Spitfire below 20,000 feet so badly that they said a Spitfire had no advantages below 20,000 feet. Do I think a Zero was the greatest fighter ever? No. Do I think a Spitfire is a turd? No. The only fighter we had in 1942 that was any kind of match for a Spitfire was the P38 and we had none available for the Pacific at that time.
