Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Flying relatively low and slow is very different between PTO and ETO.
Not necessarily, the RAF pilots recognised that the best way to defeat the Bf 109 was dog fighting, the Hurricane in particular was a superior dog fighter to both types and its low speed manoeuvrability saved its pilot on numerous occasions. German pilots were notably hubristic about the Hurricane, as we know, but it could easily turn inside a Bf 109 and they often found out the hard way that in skilled hands, the Hurri was a potent adversary - the highest scoring BoB squadron was a Hurricane unit - Polish of course.
Typical BoB combat started in the vertical plain but in order to get those pesky Englanders shooting down the bombers they had to get down and take them on, one by one, which invariably evolved into turning scraps between individual aircraft, the exact playground where the Zero excelled. Remember, the US Navy bested the Zero with superior tactics in using pairs, rather than relying on the F4F's qualities - the A6M2 was superior in almost every respect to the F4F, so they had to.
Again, without a time machine, it's impossible to judge exactly how effective the A6M would have been in Europe, but to assume it was not going to survive because it had no armour plating poor armament and only functioned in the low speed regime leaves out a whole lot of facts and evidence to the contrary.
I guess I'll have to warm up my Japanese time machine - just my luck it'll look like a Nissan Leaf and not like a Mitsubishi Zero...
I might pick and Mitsubishi Lancer Evo... You bring up good points, to me, the biggest being how a plane is used is as important, if not more so, than it's capabilities alone. Also, you would need to put some good Lucas Electronics Radios in a Zero to use it with Brit GCI / tactics.Not necessarily, the RAF pilots recognised that the best way to defeat the Bf 109 was dog fighting, the Hurricane in particular was a superior dog fighter to both types and its low speed manoeuvrability saved its pilot on numerous occasions. German pilots were notably hubristic about the Hurricane, as we know, but it could easily turn inside a Bf 109 and they often found out the hard way that in skilled hands, the Hurri was a potent adversary - the highest scoring BoB squadron was a Hurricane unit - Polish of course.
Typical BoB combat started in the vertical plain but in order to get those pesky Englanders shooting down the bombers they had to get down and take them on, one by one, which invariably evolved into turning scraps between individual aircraft at medium to low altitudes, the exact playground where the Zero excelled. Remember, the US Navy bested the Zero with superior tactics in using pairs, rather than relying on the F4F's qualities - the A6M2 was superior in almost every respect to the F4F, so they had to because the F4F couldn't survive otherwise.
Again, without a time machine, it's impossible to judge exactly how effective the A6M would have been in Europe, but to assume it was not going to survive because it had no armour plating poor armament and only functioned in the PTO low speed regime leaves out a whole lot of facts and evidence to the contrary.
I guess I'll have to warm up my Japanese time machine - just my luck it'll look like a Nissan Leaf and not like a Mitsubishi Zero...
To get range out of the Zero you had to fly a profile that didn't conduce to lengthy survival in the ETO, but was well-suited to long overwater flights, few radars, little interceptor risk, and very little flak.
I might pick and Mitsubishi Lancer Evo...
Had to look that one up. It's called the Skyline (non-export models) and now known as the GTR or Godzilla. I prefer the looks of the R33 / 34 versions myself!Nice! Leaning toward the classic Nissan Gojira, myself...
Why would the A6M have to conserve fuel in the European theater?
Again that's debatable and doesn't give the Japanese their due. Does Pat 308 believe that the Japanese do not have the ability to evolve under differing combat conditions? I can't see why not. The Zero had good altitude performance and over water and over land, what's the difference, really? What is Pat 308 expecting this Zero would do? Fly against or for the Germans over Europe? There's no reason at all that the A6M2 could not have supplanted the Bf 109 in the bomber escort role during the Battle of Britain, which is the most likely of imaginary scenarios the Zero would have to take on, time machine in hand.
t's called the Skyline (non-export models) and now known as the GTR or Godzilla. I prefer the looks of the R33 / 34 versions myself!
I might pick and Mitsubishi Lancer Evo... You bring up good points, to me, the biggest being how a plane is used is as important, if not more so, than it's capabilities alone. Also, you would need to put some good Lucas Electronics Radios in a Zero to use it with Brit GCI / tactics.
I wouldn't want to be slogging at 220mph over Axis or Allied territory, myself. Higher alt + higher speed = less range, no?
I think we're talking past each other
We might be. The thing is, I'm not sure what it is that you are envisaging by saying that the Zero wouldn't be able to operate in an ETO environment, well, I have to picture which ETO environment we are discussing, because there wasn't just one.
I still fail to see how an effective fighter like the A6M could not operate in one theater or another. The concept is a bit ill-considered, really, especially when you have aircraft like the lesser performing Hawker Hurricane active in almost every theatre during the war and as we know, the A6M could out perform the Hurricane with ease.
I was acknowledging that Pat had a point in saying that the Zero's range was largely a function of its operational conditions.
That's the point I don't agree with, because it wasn't. As mentioned, no fighter had the range of the Zero, none. Why would it not when the Bf 109, so infamously short legged reigned supreme over Western and into Eastern Europe between 1940 and 1943.
The hypothesis just doesn't stack up.
Because flying at 200 mph at ten thousand feet won't get you far in Europe.