Picture of the Day - Miscellaneous (30 Viewers)

This is not the original "Wolfchen" Nr 841, it is one of a few duplicates that were made following the Wolf's triumphant return to Germany in 1918. A number of imposters were created for propaganda purposes as by the time Wolf returned, the war was grating on the population.
You are correct. It is a replica. I just didn't bother writing the two paragraphs that came with the picture.
 
Kawasaki Ki-I Tei '3294' 2nd chutai 56 Sentai 1945 HIKO
Kawasaki Ki-I Tei '3294' 2nd chutai 56 Sentai 1945 HIKO.png
 
Mitsubishi Ki-46 of the 17th Hikodan Shireibu Teisatsu Chutai undergoing maintenance 1942 DEKI
Mitsubishi Ki-46 of the 17th Hikodan Shireibu Teisatsu Chutai undergoing maintenance 1942 DEKI.png
 
Okay, so tell me this P-66 (top photo) does not look a lot like a Zero.

VulteeP-66-1.jpg

ZeroKoga-1.jpg
 
Okay, so tell me this P-66 (top photo) does not look a lot like a Zero.

View attachment 810292
View attachment 810293
Looks exactly like a Zero except for the cowls, cowl flaps, carb scoop, oil cooler scoop. windscreen and the area in front of it, gear doors, lack of wheel flipper doors, pitot mast, razorback, fin, complete tail gear, elevators, DF loop instead of drop tank, etc.
 
Mitsubishi Ki-51 BURI
Mitsubishi Ki-51.png
 
Honestly I can't say say the first a/c looks very much like the second one in the above photos.
Jiro Horikoshi stated: "...I will state that the undercarriage retraction on the Zero was inspired by the Vought 143..."

And I recall reading many years ago that studies showed that when asked to compare two objects, non-engineers tended to describe them in term of their differences while engineers tended to describe them in terms of their similarities.
 
Last edited:
In the case of the A6M and Vought 143 the total similarities are low wing single engine, single seat, monoplane fighters with radial engines and the similar undercarriage retraction systems. Note that Horikoshi said INSPIRED BY not COPIED FROM.

The Vought used separate wings and fuselage the A6M used a single unit for wing and cockpit with the engine and rear fuselage attached. The armament is different. The Vought did not have drop tanks or folding wingtips or a tailwheel assy that retracted flush with the fuselage etc, etc, etc. No other aircraft had wing spars like those on the A6M. The internal wing structure follows British practice of the time like in the Spitfire and the landing gear strut inflation fittings are again very British just like on all the Brit aircraft of the time.

Like every other designer Horikoshi was keeping up to date on what other countries were doing and, like every other smart designer, incorporating the best of what they had learned.

Voughts claim is as spurious as Howard Hughes claim that it was a reworked Hughes Racer.
 
P-35 shows the Kartveli design in its first major form PLDA
P-35 shows the Kartveli design in its first major form PLDA.png
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back