Contrary to the IJN, the IJAF, like the RAF and Luftwaffe kept updating their fighter fleet. Though unlike the Spitfire, the IJAF replaced instead of evolved its fighters. Could the Oscar, or Zero for that matter have been continuously evolved? Was there the available space and stretch in the designs?
ISTM that if you opt for the light weight approach you're limiting the stretchability of your design unless you're willing and able to constantly re-engineer your design and revamp your production lines.
In the model railroad world, which I also inhabit, people like us are called "rivet counters".
At what cost in performance?
Two HMGs probably wouldn't protrude that much, but what about their weight, along with ammunition, mounting brackets, feed and charging systems and structural reinforcement, all in a super lightweight fighter whose stock in trade is eye-watering agility?
Thank you for the explanation. The Zero might also have had a problem with structural failure if it were able to deflect its ailerons enough at high speed. Do you have an opinion on that?
Anything can shoot down anything if it's in range. The problem with a Gladiator vs a Zero is the Zero pilot should be smart enough to boom and zoom and not try a close in turning dogfight. Also, I believe Force Z when attacked was out of range of the Zero so the real question would be whether a Gladiator had enough speed and firepower to stop, shootdown or disrupt the 2 engine bombers that attacked Force Z. Any fighter is probably better than no fighter at all, but I would not want to be in a Gladiator attacking a bomber with defensive guns and 4 303's aren't the best 2 engine bomber killing armament out there either, but I do look forward to hearing others opinion on this as well.
That's probably why Horikoshi didn't go that route. Remember, when he was designing the Zero 300 MPH was (at least in Asia) considered REAL FAST, and the I16 was state of the art. It probably wasn't til circa Battle of Midway that the high speed roll rate deficiency became recognized at MHI as a serious problem, and adding a servo tab would require redesigning and strengthening the wing structure, adding weight, and disrupting production to incorporate the changes. With the benefit of hindsight that appears a missed opportunity, but you and I weren't there to give advice.
True enough, but would they? Doctrine and training and fighter pilot culture can be hard to shake off for young guns full of swagger and mythology about their mount and it's invincibility in a knife fight.
I believe they would. I read the Zeros wanting to close in dogfight is actually a myth and against early war fighters they tended to boom and zoom, the marines at Guadalcanal were amazed that the Zero's at Guadalcanal didn't just park on their tail and stay there but instead they dove, shot and climbed away.
I agree with all of that. In fact, in my opinion, the major fault of the Zero wasn't necessarily lack of armor or self sealing tanks, I think it's main problem was lack of high speed roll. It was the only way an early war allied fighter could disengage unless his buddy chased the Zero off. In a dive past 300 mph or so any allied fighter could roll and evade the Zero. Also, in a 300+ mph dive the Zero could not roll to evade a fighter behind him. That's a real problem that was exploited, especially by the high roll rate P40 which aside from a higher top speed down low, didn't have a lot of cards to play.
depends if you can get a decent gun in the wing of Ki-43 and IF you can get the dive speed of the Ki-43 up with the bigger engine.
