N1K2-J & Ki-84 VS F4U-4

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

Leaving out the Ki-100, surely a good one. too. I think the Ki-100, Ki-84,and J2M were among the best three for Japan, but it's the poster's thread. Don't forget the USA had the Corsair, the P-51D/K. and the Hellcat (best kill record on the Pacific) plus the FM-2 (surely a good one from the kill ratio!) The F8F got there but didn't make combat and the F7F was JUST getting there when it ended, so it also didn't make combat during the war, but WAS flying at the time. I'd say anything that got into the F7F's armament stream was dead (4 x 50-cal plus 4 x 20 mm), but it never got fired in anger in WWII, so it doesn't make the team.

Collectively, the question was answered in the war and we won. Individually, I'd say the pilot would make the difference. All were strong individually. No real losers, here.
Thank you for including my avatar. I agree, it was a good one too.
 
You're welcome. Nothing a bit of extra power wouldn't make a LOT better, huh?

As I said, all were pretty decent; not a loser in there if everything happened to be running right.

In fact, if a Japanese expert, such as Saburo Sakai, were flying an A6M-5 at the war's end, he might have made a very bad day for anyone he encountered, even several at a time. Good thing the war ended when it did instead of later. And too bad it couldn't have happened even earlier.
 
In fact, if a Japanese expert, such as Saburo Sakai, were flying an A6M-5 at the war's end, he might have made a very bad day for anyone he encountered, even several at a time.
You know, its funny you should make that very statement Gregg. Several years ago I read a
short story about Saburo on the very ending days of the war. Japan had surrendered and the
armistice would be officially signed very soon. All of Saburo's unit was aware of this, however
a bomber(s) were seen headed their way and they were given the order to intercept. Saburo's
unit was (officially) flying the N1K2-J at this time but had a few A6M5s on hand. Soburo, at the
time of scrambling for their steeds, decided to jump into one of the old Zero's. He felt that the
Zero was there at the beginning of the war and it had been faithful throughout the conflict. It
was only fitting that it should be there at the end.
 
Last edited:
I met him once in Arizona at the old Doug Champlin Museum in Mesa (Falcon Field) one evening at a talk given by aces (mid 1980s). That museum was the home of the American Fighter Aces Association for a LONG time. What a nice guy he was. I bought a signed print and still have it.

He had been on a ride that afternoon in Bill Hane's P-51D "Ho Hun," and said he never thought in a million years he'd ever fly in a Mustang. Bill didn't give him the tame straight and level familiarization flight, and Saburo seriously enjoyed it. Bill even let him sit in the pilot's seat and start it up. He remarked that the engine sounded and ran silk smooth, among other interesting thoughts.
 
Excerpts from 'REPORT ON TRIALS BETWEEN FRANK 1 AND THE SEAFIRE L.F.III AT CLARK FIELD, LUZON - 29/6/45'. I left out the speed/climb comparative trials since the Frank's CSU was failing so the results seemed a bit pointless. The Admiralty indicated a better idea of the Frank's speed/climb could probably be found in TAIC Summary No.22 (versions of which I've seen posted here)

Maximum rates of turn were tried at 5,000 feet, speed 180 to 160 kts, the Seafire outturning the Frank fairly easily, although the Frank's rate of roll was 25% better.

Although the Frank 1 is not as manoeuvreable as the earlier Japanese fighters, pilots should still take advantage of high speed performance superiority when engaging it in combat.

Trim tabs, elevator only, effective.
Fowler type flaps, 0, 15, 30 degrees.
Climb angle is not steep, and normal in all respects.
Control forces are not heavy.
Handling is good up to 270 mph but is too heavy at 300 mph.
Gentle stall. Clean at 109 mph, landing gear and flaps down, 90 mph.
Vision is poor, due to narrow cockpit and forward position of the pilot's seat.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back