March until October of 1940: fighters' ranking

SaparotRob said:

I thought our BoB Zero would've been cruising at higher speed, given the reduced range (for the Zero).

Click to expand...

A whole bunch of things need to change if the Luftwaffe were to operate the A6M1. I've already pointed out that armour protection for the pilot and, ultimately, self-sealing fuel tanks would be implemented pretty darn quickly because that's the experience the Luftwaffe gained from operations in Europe from the Spanish Civil War onwards. Then there's pilot parachutes. Did the A6M1 pilots fly with them? If not, that's yet more weight. Or radios? None of these things individually make much difference but add them all up and slap them in an airframe that was cutting every last ounce of surplus weight and it will affect performance.

Then there's the differences in operational theatre. In China and the Pacific, the A6M was needed to fly very long ranges over water or territory that wasn't defended. It accomplished that goal by having the external fuel tank, by flying at speeds below those typically required for combat, and by the pilots super-leaning the engine mixture. You could apply all those actions in Europe but--and it's a big BUT--you can't do it for very long. Thus the practical operational range of your proposed Luftwaffe A6M1 will be much less than that gained by the IJNAF in the Pacific. The Luftwaffe may not even bother with the external fuel tank because it won't actually buy them much.

Finally, the Luftwaffe is going up against an adversary with a thoroughly-developed fighter warning and control system, equipped with fighters that were close peers of the A6M1. The IJNAF could afford to go in high and slow in China in 1940 because it could dictate the terms of the fight against Chinese biplane fighters. That's not an option for a Luftwaffe A6M1. They'll have to increase speed and they will be confronted by larger, more capable defensive forces than they ever faced over China (or anywhere else in the Pacific until the middle of 1942.

Yes, the A6M1 in Luftwaffe fit would almost certainly out-range the Me109 but it would do it at a cost, and it certainly wouldn't have the range it exhibited in China and the Pacific. The IJNAF fighter pilots saw themselves as airborne samurai for whom death in battle was an honour. The Luftwaffe had an entirely different world view and any A6M1 operated by the latter has to adapt to their values.

To clarify:

There are 60 A6Ms manufactured prior to October 1940?
These are A6M1s?
A6M1s and A6M2s don't have the upgrades that allow for better control at higher speeds?
How many of these have made it to units by October?
If Germany is to use them for teh BoB, do Japan give up theirs, or does Germany start manufacturing them under licence?
if Germany is manufacturing them, would they appear before the Fw 190A?
Apart from armour or self-sealing tanks, is there any equipment that the A6M lacked that would be required to work with the Luftwaffe?

Seafires and Merlin 32. It looks like a small number of Seafire IIC were converted to LF by installation of Merlin 32, none officially produced. Merlin 32 production began in June 1942, with 256 built to the end of the year. Barracuda II, 1 produced in October 1942, then production from December 1942 on. Seafire IIC production at Supermarine June 1942 to April 1943, at Westland December 1942 to September 1943. Seafire III production began at Westland in April 1943.

GrauGeist said:

It's obvious by now that you have an agenda that reaches past the A6M's merits..

Click to expand...

Suburo Sakai was seriously wounded and blinded in one eye from a .30 cal bullet that hit him after penetrating through the unarmored windscreen of his A6M, he later stated that air forces shouldn't fight a war with acrobatic aircraft, enough said.

This is an exercise for some of the aircraft discussed here in the March - October 1940 period. Not sure if the Australian Zero test is a good fit but it gives an idea. I like the two speed blower on the Zero's engine.

Greg Boeser said:

Could you give me a reference on those numbers, please?

Click to expand...

Look at the results from the Philippine sea as an example, first attack 41 aircraft lost out of 68, second attack 97 out of 107 aircraft shot down, fourth attack all 49 aircraft shot down or damaged beyond repair, Alex Vraciu: The Navy's most indestructible ace six bombers with only 360 rounds of ammunition, yeah protection is overrated.

Mike Williams said:

This is an exercise for some of the aircraft discussed here in the March - October 1940 period. Not sure if the Australian Zero test is a good fit but it gives an idea. I like the two speed blower on the Zero's engine.

View attachment 657154

Click to expand...

The Darwin MkV's were slower than the Hurricane by about 2mph, no wonder they struggled.

PAT303 said:

The Darwin MkV's were slower than the Hurricane by about 2mph, no wonder they struggled.

Click to expand...

I think Battle of Britain era Hurricanes might have had a hard time against Zeros - in the what if imaginary fantasy world discussed. BoB Spit I's- probably not if they used half decent tactics.

pinsog said:

If Japan had only faced Spitfire Mark V Tropicals they wouldn't have lost. In fact they probably would have lost more pilots in training than in actual combat.

Click to expand...

The Darwin MkV's with low boost Merlin 46's were slower than a standard Merlin 45 engined trop with a 90G drop tank fitted. Spitfire Mk.VB (Tropical) AB.320 Report, a 1940 MkII would better both versions of the MkV plus the A6M purely on performance.

Mike Williams said:

I think Battle of Britain era Hurricanes might have had a hard time against Zeros - in the what if imaginary fantasy world discussed. BoB Spit I's- probably not if they used half decent tactics.

Click to expand...

I think so too, it would come done to who had the better position or saw the other first unless the Hurri's paired up and used tactics like the thatch weave

Did the Sakae Model 12 used in the Zero Model 11 have a two speed supercharger? If not, that Zero curve I used in the comparison chart may not be appropriate. That would be unfortunate as the curve derives from a nice data set. Looks like the Sakae Model 21 did have two speeds.

wuzak said:

To clarify:

There are 60 A6Ms manufactured prior to October 1940?
These are A6M1s?
A6M1s and A6M2s don't have the upgrades that allow for better control at higher speeds?
How many of these have made it to units by October?
If Germany is to use them for teh BoB, do Japan give up theirs, or does Germany start manufacturing them under licence?
if Germany is manufacturing them, would they appear before the Fw 190A?
Apart from armour or self-sealing tanks, is there any equipment that the A6M lacked that would be required to work with the Luftwaffe?

Click to expand...

Hi
Between March and October the 'Zero' was in pre-production, start of full production and operational trials (in small numbers) in China, it would not be available to the Germans whether from Japanese (which would have slowed down deliveries to the IJN) or licence production in Germany. We should remember that the 'Zero' first flew April 1939 (3 years or so after the Bf 109, Hurricane and Spitfire), the Fw 190 first flew in June 1939 so these aircraft were near contemporaries, so the Germans would have been stupid to decide to produce a 'Zero' which would have a entry into service after the Fw 190 probably. Also in the real world the Fw 190 performed better than the 'Zero' would have done against the Spitfire V on its own turf (a totally different ball game to the Darwin Spitfires). Armour plate in fighters in 1940 was not a luxury it was essential for air combat in the ETO, the Japanese also found it was needed during combat during 1942 which is why it was added to 'old' designs and built into new ones.
Japanese aircraft that would have been available during March-October 1940 would have been the Ki 27 'NATE' (first flight October 1936) and A5M4 'CLAUDE' (First flight February 1935), it was these two aircraft that were the contemporaries of the Bf 109, Hurricane and Spitfire, however, you may not want to use them over Britain during 1940. In 1938 British Naval Intelligence judged the 'CLAUDE' as the best carrier fighter in the world, but probably not good to use over Britain in 1940.
The 'ZERO' was a 1941 fighter rather than a 1940 fighter and it, despite wishful thinking, be anywhere near operationally available between March and October 1940. We should also remember that the Japanese CAGs of 1940 did not have the aircraft that were available to them at PH in December 1941 so March-October 1940 was all rather different than December 1941 into 1942. If they magically appeared in European waters during March-October 1940 they also may have had serious problems particularly as the Japanese Navy had very poor anti-submarine capability as the RN knew as during 1939-1940 they had sent submarines (eg. Regulus and Rainbow) into Japanese waters, which included shadowing Japanese fleet exercises and taking photos of ships undetected. The first the Japanese realised this had happened was when they captured the photos (probably then used as ship recognition material) at Singapore in 1942 (I don't know if the US Navy undertook this type of mission as well?), so I would expect that the Japanese fleet, like aircraft, appearing in Europe in 1940 may also have had problems.

Mike

MikeMeech said:

In 1938 British Naval Intelligence judged the 'CLAUDE' as the best carrier fighter in the world

Click to expand...

I presume you have a reference for this statement. Which one?

BTW, why the british didn't think that if the A5M was the best carrierborne fighter in 1938, there should, could, would be one better in the pipeline for service in a couple of years? Racist bias could be an answer but wouldn't those racist bias prevented the consideration of the A5M as the best in it's category?

Mike Williams said:

Did the Sakae Model 12 used in the Zero Model 11 have a two speed supercharger? If not, that Zero curve I used in the comparison chart may not be appropriate. That would be unfortunate as the curve derives from a nice data set. Looks like the Sakae Model 21 did have two speeds.

Click to expand...

Just 1-speed S/C on the Sakae 12.
The Sakae 21 was with 2-speed S/C. It was all-together an upgrade over the 10 series, with bigger impeller and allowed for greater RPM - all totalling in greater power both in low and high altitudes. Internal changes upped the weight by some 60 kg.

tomo pauk said:

Just 1-speed S/C on the Sakae 12.
The Sakae 21 was with 2-speed S/C. It was all-together an upgrade over the 10 series, with bigger impeller and allowed for greater RPM - all totalling in greater power both in low and high altitudes. Internal changes upped the weight by some 60 kg.

Click to expand...

Thank you tomo. I should replace (or delete) that Zero curve on the comparison chart above but I haven't yet found a more appropriate date set for a Zero with the 1-speed Sakae 12.

J-Aircraft has a good detail listing of the A6M's chronology, from the A6M1 to the A6M8 including production totals of all types, here:

Escuadrilla Azul said:

I presume you have a reference for this statement. Which one?

BTW, why the british didn't think that if the A5M was the best carrierborne fighter in 1938, there should, could, would be one better in the pipeline for service in a couple of years? Racist bias could be an answer but wouldn't those racist bias prevented the consideration of the A5M as the best in it's category?

Click to expand...

Hi
Andrew Boyd's 'British Naval Intelligence - Through the Twentieth Century' Seaforth Publishing, 2020, has the following:

His earlier book also contains some interesting information 'The Royal Navy in Eastern Waters',Seaforth, 2017, here are a few pages reference 1941 knowledge:


Mike

Fwiw, I swapped out the Aussie Zero data for US Navy data for a single-speed A6M2, although I have serious reservations about the Zero's inclusion in a BoB period comparison.

MikeMeech said:

Hi
Andrew Boyd's 'British Naval Intelligence - Through the Twentieth Century' Seaforth Publishing, 2020, has the following:
View attachment 657180
His earlier book also contains some interesting information 'The Royal Navy in Eastern Waters',Seaforth, 2017, here are a few pages reference 1941 knowledge:
View attachment 657181
View attachment 657182
Mike

Click to expand...

Thanks!

So british intelligence had a pretty good knowledge of the japanese air and naval forces but some how it didn't arrive at squadron level. Or was it utterly dismished?

pinsog said:

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.

Click to expand...

The Hurricane gets a big advantage in toughness, and any high speed ( over 250 mph) maneuvers. These two are close enough that the winner is who ever has the tactical advantage. In the combats between the two that I have read and analyzed, it seems that the winner is who ever has the altitude advantage. Keep in mind that in the combats in the PacificTheater ,between the two types, the Zero had an average numerical advantage of almost 4 to 1.