Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Of course it would, but the allies in 1941 were officially UK and Russia and primarily concerned with defence. Nice to think about flying to Hamburg and Paris but you will meet Bf109s
And Fw190s!Of course it would, but the allies in 1941 were officially UK and Russia and primarily concerned with defence. Nice to think about flying to Hamburg and Paris but you will meet Bf109s
Yes if you have them in 1941 but who had them and how many? The Japanese had a huge area of widely spread targets around the pacific and frequently had the advantage of surprise. There was never any surprise in Europe neither were there any bombers that could make any impact. Any attack against Europe in 1941 was at the same disadvantages as the LW had in 1940 in the BoB.I think the point is if you had (good) fighters with that kind of range you wouldn't have to stay on the defensive. You could raid their airfields before they took off. You could escort your bombers to Hamburg and start bombing them back. You could bomb their fleet and pre-empt any invasion activity. If you were the Russians you could destroy their supply lines long before they even get to Stalingrad.
If you have ever been in a fist fight - defense and counter punching is fine but it helps a lot if you can put some pressure back on your opponent at the same time.
Of course you also have to have enough fighters and pilots to go on the offensive and England and Russia probably didn't in 1941.
S
Yes if you have them in 1941 but who had them and how many? The Japanese had a huge area of widely spread targets around the pacific and frequently had the advantage of surprise. There was never any surprise in Europe neither were there any bombers that could make any impact. Any attack against Europe in 1941 was at the same disadvantages as the LW had in 1940 in the BoB.
Apparently being able to fight 200 miles away is much more important than being able to fight at 20,000 ft.
Pbehn,
A little more modern tie into range versus performance. In 2000 we took our F15As to Lange AB, Germany to fight the Luftwaffe MiG29As. Both of us were without external tanks. I did a one vs one Basic Fighter Maneuver (BFM or dogfight) sortie. We took off at 1255. I used full afterburner, he used Mil (non afterburner or AB). I climbed in min AB, he did not. I did two 180 degree full AB warm up turns. He did not. We then fought and when he called knock it off (KIO) for bingo fuel, I reformed on him for a quick battle damage assessment (BDA) as he pointed at the field about 10 miles away. He called the KIO at 1307 or 12 minutes after takeoff. I then went and found another fight before RTB.
The moral of the story is I would never fear an airstrike or having him show up in my pattern unannounced. Also if I were to participate in a strike against his field or something he is protecting my goal would be to get him airborne early then delay the fight. He will bingo out in the middle of the fight and he will die trying to get back on the deck.
If you have a tool that your opponent does not then you can do something he can't. Use it wisely and it's an advantage.
Cheers,
Biff
Biff, the point I was making is that if your airfields are being attacked by bombers escorted by fighters at 20 to 25,00 ft the first thing to do is stop it, not to make plans to bomb a city on their northern coast or a capital city just captured by your enemy who he couldn't give a damn about.
In all discussions there is a time element. How many zeros did Japan have in 1939, or in 1940, then 1941? Between 1939 and 1943 there was no country able to undertake a strategic campaign worth the name in daylight.I disagree since their main disadvantage was the range of their fighters.
If you had zeroes and whatever long range bombers (I don't know - Wellingtons?) you could attack German installations in France from almost any direction - from the Bay of Biscay. You could start hitting their rail yards, airfields etc. if the Japanese could do it to the Americans in the Philippines they could do it to the Germans in Belgium or France.
I mean what if you literally had zeroes. Sure you would have a high attrition rate but you had that anyway in the BoB. If you had the ability to hit back - you could shorten the battle quite a bit.
I would say this - a Zero, A6M2- was arguably as good as a Spitfire MK I or II in a one-on-one fight, and certainly better than a Hurricane. Superior maneuverability of course, but also 20mm cannons and climb like a jet. Add to that 3,000 km range...? You don't think that would help A LOT? I think that helps explain the value of the Zero.
Seriously Biff until late 1943/44 what would you want to escort in daylight? Wellingtons Lancasters and early B24- B17s? The whole "enchilada" of the allied campaign came together in 1943/4 you cannot just leap forward 2 years, the UK didn't even have the airfields, Oh and there was a little problem in the Atlantic at the time.Pbehn,
Understood. You must deal with the gators closest to the canoe first. Then when the opportunity arises kill the nest and you don't have a gator problem for long.
The Spitfire and Bf109 are both what I would classify as Defensive Counter Air (DCA) or point defense fighters. They are pinnacle examples of that. It took until the Mustang to find a good solution to the range / performance equation.
Cheers,
Biff
In all discussions there is a time element. How many zeros did Japan have in 1939, or in 1940, then 1941? Between 1939 and 1943 there was no country able to undertake a strategic campaign worth the name in daylight.
Seriously Biff until late 1943/44 what would you want to escort in daylight? Wellingtons Lancasters and early B24- B17s? The whole "enchilada" of the allied campaign came together in 1943/4 you cannot just leap forward 2 years, the UK didn't even have the airfields, Oh and there was a little problem in the Atlantic at the time.
Which bridges and rail yards? Unless you are going to invade the enemy doesn't give a damn unless you hit Germany. The Wellington had a good range and a good bomb load but it didn't have a good range and bomb load, it was also very poorly defended like all early bombers.Strategic is overrated. I'm thinking more Operational. Airfields, bridges, ships and railyards, rather than factories or God forbid cities. Wellingtons had an amazing range too (looked 'em up) and carried a good (4500 lb) bomb load. With effective fighter protection they could be pretty dangerous Operational pests IMO. Give me 200 A6Ms and 100 Wellingtons and I'll cause the Germans some headaches.
Just quickly looking in Wikipedia, it appears like they had about 1,500 A6Ms by April 1942 (65 model 11, 740 Model 21 built by Mitsubishi, 800 by Nakajima). Middle of 1941 they had maybe half that number.
Model 32 (A6M3) with two speed supercharger Sakae 21 came out in April 1942, and Model 22 came out in Dec 1942.
A6M2 in particular was a really good fighter for 1941 IMO. They didn't really improve it though until the A6M5 in August 1943, which is too late.
S
Which bridges and rail yards? Unless you are going to invade the enemy doesn't give a damn unless you hit Germany. The Wellington had a good range and a good bomb load but it didn't have a good range and bomb load, it was also very poorly defended like all early bombers.
Seriously Biff until late 1943/44 what would you want to escort in daylight? Wellingtons Lancasters and early B24- B17s? The whole "enchilada" of the allied campaign came together in 1943/4 you cannot just leap forward 2 years, the UK didn't even have the airfields, Oh and there was a little problem in the Atlantic at the time.
I believe the US received about 600 Spitfires (reverse lend lease) many of which were used in North Africa/Med to provide top cover for those OH so versatile P-40s and P-39s.
Range with a 10 minute combat allowance was an astonishing 125NM.
Just swapping out MGs for cannon isn't that simple. Can the mount handle the recoil? How much will the weight for the cannon plus sufficient ammo cause a performance penalty?Ok again, I am keeping in mind that this is total speculation and frankly a little ridiculous, but for the sake of discussion:
Wellington may be poorly defended (sort of - it was actually fairly well armed I'd just swap out the tail guns for 20mm cannons but whatevs) but so was a G4M let alone a Ki -21. I mean ultimately B-24s and B-17s were too poorly defended to fight on their own, right?
But protected by a swarm of zeroes ... big difference. A bf 109 would have to press home attacks to get to the bombers and that would be pretty dangerous. Substitute a swam of (unhistorical) ultra long range Spitfires. Same thing.
What targets? I say hit the airfields and all the supply arteries leading to them - the Germans have to bring fuel, ammunition, bombs, spare parts, replacement engines and crew to the airfields right? Wreck that s***t. Just like P-51s did after finishing bomber escort much later in the War.
S
Just swapping out MGs for cannon isn't that simple. Can the mount handle the recoil? How much will the weight for the cannon plus sufficient ammo cause a performance penalty?
And "swarms" of Zeros were not enough protection for the G4M just as "swarms" of Bf109s were not enough for the Do17s and He111s. Taking it bit further, "swarms" of P-51s weren't enough to protect the B-24s and B-17s.
In a bombing campaign, you have to concentrate (snip) Bombing airfields sets the enemy back only for as long as it takes to get the replacements and repair the tarmac/ramp, etc. but if you bomb the source of those replacement aircraft, you're killing the tree at the root.
'Bombing factories, supply depots, power generation, fuel supplies and such, has an immediate effect.
The early Zero carried 141-142 US gallons without the drop tank ( and strangely less than 10 gallons difference from a P-40) . A Spitfire carried 100 US gallons. DO you really think that an extra 40 gallons is going to give hundreds of extra miles? like well over 200 miles more?
It also wasn't that fast. This is the early ones with the single speed supercharger. Against a 109 it is slower, doesn't climb much different at some altitudes, turns better, isn't any better armed and has no protection.