For that plan to work, we only have the RAF to cease to exist, and North Atlantic to be moved 2000 miles east.
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
For that plan to work, we only have the RAF to cease to exist, and North Atlantic to be moved 2000 miles east.
????? The whole premise of this thread is Germans and Japanese switch aircraft. If that's the case then Zeros fly fighter sweeps over the North Sea looking for recon planes and over the Atlantic as well protecting U boats. G3M and G4M torpedo bombers attack anything that ventures out from under the umbrella of the short range Hurricanes and Spitfires.
Shortround6
Major General
Ah, the mystical-magical time machine.
The G3M had a top speed of about 233mph? Even a Blenheim fighter could catch that.
First production G4M was completed in April of 1941.
Number available in May of 1941????
Defensive armament was one 20mm gun in the tail and four Lewis Machine guns (Japanese Navy Type 92)
April and May of 1941 was when the Japanese fixed the wing/aileron flutter problem on the Zero. Zeros Built before then had some real restrictions on dive speed (or never exceed speed ) and allowable G loads.
By April of 1941 there were at least 3 factories making Beaufighters and the First MK IIs were delivered in late April.
No match for a normal Zero but G3Ms and even G4Ms would be in deep trouble if the Zeros didn't get most of the twin engine fighters.
The G3M had a top speed of about 233mph? Even a Blenheim fighter could catch that.
First production G4M was completed in April of 1941.
Number available in May of 1941????
Defensive armament was one 20mm gun in the tail and four Lewis Machine guns (Japanese Navy Type 92)
April and May of 1941 was when the Japanese fixed the wing/aileron flutter problem on the Zero. Zeros Built before then had some real restrictions on dive speed (or never exceed speed ) and allowable G loads.
By April of 1941 there were at least 3 factories making Beaufighters and the First MK IIs were delivered in late April.
No match for a normal Zero but G3Ms and even G4Ms would be in deep trouble if the Zeros didn't get most of the twin engine fighters.
Ahh. Wasn't sure on when Beaufighter came along . I thought it was later, it was a great machine and a definite problem to unescorted torpedo planes
Shortround6
Major General
Most of the Early Beaufighters were going to night fighter units.
Wiki says the 200th Filton built plane was completed May 10th 1941, the 100th plane was delivered in Dec. The Weston factory test flew their first plane Feb 20th 1941 and Fairey test flew their first on March 7th.
But faced with a different threat the British could have used different dispositions/deployments.
Wiki says the 200th Filton built plane was completed May 10th 1941, the 100th plane was delivered in Dec. The Weston factory test flew their first plane Feb 20th 1941 and Fairey test flew their first on March 7th.
But faced with a different threat the British could have used different dispositions/deployments.
Agreed with different uses. Beaufighter was a definite tail kicker down low.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,997
- Jun 25, 2013
Japanese aircraft were very well designed for the environment in which they fought and Japanese pilots were probably better trained than any others early in the war and consistently underestimated when first met in action.
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,618
- Dec 6, 2006
The first P40 with 4 x .50 didn't appear until a year after the Battle of Britain. Even the P40 A with 2 x .50 was barely in existence during the B of B. At the start of the Battle of Britain daylight raids 36 P-40s had been accepted by the US. By the time the massed daylight raids ended in October 1940 a grand total of 445 had been accepted. The first time a P-40 actually saw combat was in June 1941, by which time the 20 mm Hispano was standard on RAF fighters. If the USAAF had fought the Battle of Britain it would have been with P-26s, P-35s and P -36s armed with 2 x .30s or 1 x .50 and 1 x .30
As for the F4F, it only existed as prototypes at the start of the Battle. By the end of October 64 had been accepted. It first saw combat in December 1941. The USN would have fought the Battle of Britain with Grumman F2F and F3F biplanes.
Last edited:
Luftwaffe's Zeros can't fly over the most part of North Atlantic, even if they are located in the UK. That is unless we whip up some aircraft carriers for the Kriegsmarine.
The U-boat war was mainly fought at the Eastern Approaches - ie. west-ish of Ireland. Even the drop-tank outfitted Bf 110s were found lacking in range there.
The premise wrecks the Luftwaffe, giving them lesser aircraft than what they had.
Admiral Beez
Major
If this is Axis focused, why no love for the Italians? Can they swap out their Falcos and Sparrowhawks for Oscars and Bettys?
Admiral Beez
Major
When shopping the Japanese catalogue the Germans can order their Zeros, Kates and Vals with optional extras; I suggest a pair of Shōkaku-class aircraft carriers.
That might keep Bismarck afloat through 1941-42.
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
This brings up an interesting point.
If the British could deal with the agile Italian fighters of similar speed and firepower to the Japanese planes and better protected why would Japanese planes dominate in Europe or the Med?
And a similar point, why couldn't the British deal with the Japanese?
As far as Italians go, if the Japanese planes came with Japanese pilots and Japanese torpedos, I would suggest the Mediterranean Sea would become an axis lake. Zeros clear the skies as torpedo planes, free of fighter interference, set up on both bows of capital ships with a hammer and anvil attack. Vals go after cruisers and destroyers. Operation Pedestal would never succeed against a Japanese defended Mediterranean Sea.
cherry blossom
Senior Airman
- 513
- Apr 23, 2007
Whilst I agree with most of SH6's points about the Japanese aircraft available in May 1941, a force of perhaps 60 G3Ms and perhaps a very few G4Ms operating from Brittany in the morning of 27th May would have had approximately the same distance to fly to attack King George V and Rodney as the same types would fly to attack Prince of Wales and Repulse on 10th December. Admittedly, they are flying into a gale and might be attacked by Ark Royal's Fulmars but if they make the same first hit on KGV as on PoW, we might have the unique spectacle of two enemy battleships turning in circles.
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,997
- Jun 25, 2013
One possibility is that Japanese pilots, at least into 1942, were better than German pilots (they were certainly underestimated, and IJN fighter pilots, at least, demonstrated long-range navigation skills few contemporary fighter pilots could match).
I suspect the reasons that the Japanese air forces did well were multiple and complex. Training and tactics were most likely more important than hardware.
Admiral Beez
Major
Fighting Japan was never a priority to Britain, while fighting Britain was a top priority of Japan. Resources were allocated accordingly.
If fighting Japan was a priority Britain wouldn't have sent green pilots in old Hawks, obsolete Buffaloes, BoB-worn Hurricanes, and deathtrap Blenheims and Vilderbeests to Malaya and Burma from 1941 through to end 1942. Instead Britain would send top combat pilots in Spitfires, Typhoons, Mosquitos and Beaufighters.
Last edited:
That kinda doesn't do the Germans any credit at all; it certainly happened, but far less than you might believe. The crucial point with the Bf 109's range was that the pilots knew how much combat time they had and broke off combat to get home so this didn't happen, rather than flying until they had no fuel left.
True, but again, that might not have guaranteed the Japanese or in this case the Germans overall success if their basic strategy is at fault and the reasons why they lost the battle in the first place still stand. Again, environmental factors come into play. Also, for every measure there is a countermeasure. The Fw 190 and losses Fighter Command was taking over France in 1941/42 was met by the fitting of the 60 Series Merlin to the Spit V airframe, producing the Mk IX, which was superior to the Fw 190A and the Bf 109F, and the A6M2.
Let's also not forget that the Germans felt the same way about the Hurricane until they realised they couldn't meet it on equal terms in a dogfight. The Hurricane could surprise and could outfly the Zero in the vertical plane, as long as the British pilots kept their speed up.
Hubris in warfare is bad.
Assuming victory just because of superior technology doesn't always work. Sure, the Zero would have helped the Germans if they had it instead of the Bf 109, and we can assume that had the Kriegsmarine had Japanese torpedoes, they would have done some serious damage to the RN's numbers, but strategy is what counts and with the Senior Nazi personnel being a bunch of basket cases and attempting to thrive in the toxic environment they existed in means they are definitely going to lose, regardless of what equipment they have.
Last edited:
Yes indeed and this is a classic example of where a hubristic attitude didn't work out so well against those holding it.
Admiral Beez
Major
The RAF helped Britain to successfully hold the line, Japan never got further than Burma and never managed to cut off the supply roads from India to China, ie. the entire purpose of Japan going into Burma.
If the IJAF was so supreme can we assume they were let down by their IJA colleagues on the ground, especially in 1944 at Operation U-Go? Otherwise how did the RAF stay in the field in India?
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
