March until October of 1940: fighters' ranking

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

Clayton Magnet said:
Hurricane IIA and Spitfire IIA armament would be almost tailor made for engaging a Zero. 160 rounds per second, loaded with (50%?) Mark VI De Wilde incendiary ammunition hitting an unarmoured airframe stuffed full of fuel.
Click to expand...
Destroying a Zero wasn't a huge problem, it's being able to hit the thing that's the problem. For anyone here that shoots a shotgun, they can tell you that killing a dove isn't particularly hard IF you can hit the speedy little critters. Considering how little flight and gunnery training the British pilots had that were thrown into combat, I certainly wouldn't want to be in their shoes.

I'm a fan of the 50 BMG, but I have begun to wonder within the last year if the Wildcat would have been better off with 8 30's instead of 4 50's because of the substantial weight savings.
 
And here is part of the problem.

300-400 A6M2s in the summer/fall of 1940 WITH 300-400 pilots trained to the same standard the Japanese had in 1940-41 or 300-400 A6M2s flown by 300-400 German pilots with a fair number of them flown by pilots not much better (if any better) than the British pilots thrown into the the thick of things in 1940.
 
Hi
If we are dealing between March and October 1940, the Zero's would not be even noticed unless the development and production timeline is moved forward magically. 15 pre-production A6M2s were sent to China in July 1940 and saw their first successful action on 13th September 1940, reinforced later by some production aircraft. They would have had a 'zero' impact in 1940 during the BoB period. 837 were produced between March 1939 to March 1942 period but mainly 1941 and 1942 not 1940 so for combat use not a 1940 aircraft really. Japanese pilots and aircraft may also had a problem adjusting to a sophisticated air defence system with rather more opposing aircraft than they met in the Far East in the real world of 1942.

Mike
 
pinsog said:
I'm a fan of the 50 BMG, but I have begun to wonder within the last year if the Wildcat would have been better off with 8 30's instead of 4 50's because of the substantial weight savings.
Click to expand...
Against Japanese forces, I would certainly agree, the .30 Browning was also more reliable at that point in time. If its a Wildcat intercepting German and Italian bombers in the Mediterranean, the 30's might prove to be a little inadequate. Although the Fulmars seemed to do a good job of it.
I remember reading a Japanese report (I forget where I saw it) on the Hurricane Mk.IIB, and it was fairly dismissive of the types performance, but they were VERY wary of the 12 machine guns.
 
Equal pilots Zero vs Hurricane: top speed and climb equal. Acceleration and turn go to Zero. Dive goes to Hurricane but slow acceleration would allow Zero to get in good burst before Hurricane pulled away. I'd give it to Zero if the pilots were equal.

Equal pilots Zero vs Spitfire I or II: speed goes to Spitfire 360-330 mph. Climb Spitfire might climb faster but Zero climbs steeper. Turn goes to Zero. Acceleration goes to Zero. Dive goes to Spitfire but acceleration is slow allowing Zero to get in some good bursts before Spitfire pulls away. I'd say this would be as close a contest as Spitfire vs ME109

(If we are using time machine I don't want us bogged down in the fact there were only about 50 Zeros on the planet at the time)
 
Since we are doing what if's we will ignore how many Zeros there were, but there weren't enough I agree.

A sophisticated air defense just means they probably meet the Hurricanes or Spitfires at their own altitude instead of catching them climbing or on the ground. I don't think it matters with the Hurricane, once they pass each other at the merge I personally think the Hurricane is in deep trouble. I think Zero vs Mark I or II Spitfire is a toss up
 
Any love for the D.520? Longest range of all Western fighters, has a potent cannon, French (Docavia book) notes the speed figures in ballpark with Bf 109E.
 
Not a lot of love because apparently there were problems using the full fuel capacity in combat (CG problems).

The cannon was potent but there was only one cannon with 60 rounds.

I have some doubts about the view over the nose. It makes the Spitfire nose look good for deflection shooting.
 
MikeMeech said:
Japanese pilots and aircraft may also had a problem adjusting to a sophisticated air defence system with rather more opposing aircraft than they met in the Far East in the real world of 1942
Click to expand...
worthy of note, that the aircraft the Zero would be facing in 1940 Europe would be arguably higher performing than the ones they met in the far east in 1941/42. A 1940 Spitfire Mk.II in England would even have some performance advantages over the Mk.V's the A6M's faced over Darwin in 1943
SaparotRob said:
How reliable were the 20 mm in the A6M2s?
Click to expand...
The Japanese Type 99 cannon was essentially an Oerlikon FF, and by all accounts, was a very reliable weapon.
I think the British Air Ministry may have been better off to adopt the Oerlikon FFL instead of the Hispano HS.404 in the 1930's, and spent a couple years developing it to increase the rate of fire. Could have been reliable, and available for the BoB
 
Howard Gibson said:
Somewhat slower than a Bf109E, it had a substantially lower rate of climb, and would have been vulnerable to Luftwaffe hit and run tactics. Eric Brown hated the one he flew.
Click to expand...

The French pilots 1940, with far, far less stick time than E. Brown seem to have an opposite opinion.


Fuel tanks were in the wings between the spars, ie. about as CoG netutral as possible.
Time of fire was same as with the MG FF. Yes, the Bf 109 has two of them, the Hispano has substantially better MV for better chance to hit.
 
I know almost nothing of the D520. Can you give us speed and climb figures?
 
part of the idea for the HS 404 cannon was that it would fire at a higher rate of fire than the Oerlikon guns.
The gas tube was insure the gun was locked when firing and wouldn't unlock until the shell was part way down the barrel.
The gun was a sort of hybrid system.
The way to get the Oerlikon to fire faster was to lighten the bolt and other recoiling parts while sticking stronger springs in the gun.
You are depending on not only clever design but metallurgy to keep from breaking the parts and/or breaking the springs.
And/or accepting a shorter gun life ( more inspections/more replacement parts or tossing the entire gun after a certain point).

A number of guns were made to fire faster at some point in their lives. The question is how long did it really take to improve things?
 
pinsog said:
I know almost nothing of the D520. Can you give us speed and climb figures?
Click to expand...

Speed and time-to-altitude graphs are posted here (from the Docavia book on the D.520).
Granted, the 570 km/h lines for both Bf 109E and later D.520 (slightly better engine than the early D.520s, oil system cooling change, better exhausts) are a tad optimistic, to say at least.


HS 404's rate of fire was toned down from 700 (advertised by the HS company before the war) to 600 rd/min (actual, such design was licenced to the British) to improve reliability IIRC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
Aerodynamics of Japanese fighters
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
Holtzauge
S
Small wings/high wing loading of German fighters
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
7K
Shortround6
S
The poor performance of the 343 Kokutai against USAAF fighters
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
7K
GrauGeist
Best piston engine(s) for fighters of 1945?
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
12K
spicmart
S
E
Daily List of LW Bombing Targets, MAY 1940
Replies
1
Views
575
Nick Beale
Menu
Log in
Register