Swede Ware
Airman
Was the A6M5C assigned to Imperial Army units? If so can anyone point me in the direction for markings? Appreciate any info on this..........
Question on the A6M5C assignments.....Army and Navy
- Thread starter Swede Ware
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
I don't think it was flown by the IJA.
I am not absolute but I don't think it was.
I am not absolute but I don't think it was.
- Thread starter
- #3
Swede Ware
Airman
I was wondering with the flip up wing tips, but along about this time being picky about the A/C that was available would not be a great decision!
buffnut453
Captain
I've never heard of any A6M variants serving with the IJA. The IJA had the Ki-27, Ki-43, Ki-44, Ki-61 and Ki-84 as the primary fighter types during WW2.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
The Imperial Japanese Navy's biggest enemy was the Imperial Japanese Army.
Cold day in hell before the Navy gives it's fighters to the Army.
Great decisions is not an Imperial Japan thing. Bang on stupidity though.
Cold day in hell before the Navy gives it's fighters to the Army.
Great decisions is not an Imperial Japan thing. Bang on stupidity though.
Just Schmidt
Senior Airman
None of my books mentions any A6M serving the army, anyway by the time the A6M5c appeared both services had better land based aircraft.
The enmity between army and navy was very real, still there was some use of the same aircraft. The Ki-15 (Babs) was also built for the navy as C5M, and The Ki-67 was also used by the navy (as far as i know with no special designation). The IJAAF's involvement on New Guinea was due to the navy requesting help, the air war in this part of the pacific was otherwise the responsibility of IJNAF. It is easy to imagine the navy's frustration having to use the P-word to the army on this occasion.
The enmity between army and navy was very real, still there was some use of the same aircraft. The Ki-15 (Babs) was also built for the navy as C5M, and The Ki-67 was also used by the navy (as far as i know with no special designation). The IJAAF's involvement on New Guinea was due to the navy requesting help, the air war in this part of the pacific was otherwise the responsibility of IJNAF. It is easy to imagine the navy's frustration having to use the P-word to the army on this occasion.
- Thread starter
- #7
Swede Ware
Airman
It was nothing that that I could find in any of the histories. What was throwing me off was it looked as if some of them were painted in a green color rather than the light pale of the carrier borne A/C.
Just Schmidt
Senior Airman
Many of them undoubtedly were, and a variety of other camouflage schemes as well. I think the pale scheme went entirely out of use at some point, but somebody may correct me or, conversely, tell you when it happened.
- Thread starter
- #9
Swede Ware
Airman
Then it would be a safe assumption that some naval assets were stationed on land and operated that way? So, if that would be the case were they under Army control or were they considered IJN assets only?
The green colour for tops and the grey one for undersides were introduced on the July 3rd, 1943 as memo serves.
- Thread starter
- #11
Swede Ware
Airman
I will assume that except for tail markings, IJN and Army A/C would look alike in the air. Unlike the Army AF and Naval A/C using obvious color differences for visual recognition. Are there any reference sites on line that would show the appropriate markings?
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Naval aircraft did operate from land bases such as the bombers.
Again Navy and Army separate so I doubt local Army commanders had command of Navy squadrons.
Again Navy and Army separate so I doubt local Army commanders had command of Navy squadrons.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
To my knowledge there wasn't a marking which differentiate navy from army.
Colour schemes and camouflage are a box of frogs which is a rabbit hole to fall down in.
But there wasn't a neon sign saying army or navy.
Colour schemes and camouflage are a box of frogs which is a rabbit hole to fall down in.
But there wasn't a neon sign saying army or navy.
- Thread starter
- #14
Swede Ware
Airman
So, if I can get some idea of even "close" markings I should be OK?
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
I remember reading the colour scheme of the Zeroes at Pearl Harbour are still debated and which shade of grey was used.
So.....
1 white stripe for Shokaku and 2 white stripes for Zuikaku.
So.....
1 white stripe for Shokaku and 2 white stripes for Zuikaku.
Navy units went island hopping as much as their army counterparts and developed their own interceptors, the Mitsubishi J2M and Kawasaki N1K series were land-based navy fighters, for example, as well as A6Ms being extensively used from land bases. The loss of the carriers at Midway put a lot of emphasis on the navy's land-based resources.
The IJA and IJN had distinctively different colours and unit markings, if you wanna be specific. Here's a detailed site with colour chips, but I suggest you research the specific aircraft colour scheme you want to make.
- Thread starter
- #18
Swede Ware
Airman
Excellent!! I appreciate this. After years I thought I'd try a Zero for the weathering work. All my A/C have been OD, weather worn or big color and finish racing planes. With some rust n' dust armor thrown in. Had never given any thought to the three ring circus with the Japanese A/C.. My first clue was two different interior colors by the builders and telling the two apart by the line of the belly paint!
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
If you want to research a particular aircraft at a particular date then you have to research that particular aircraft at that particular date.
Apart from the big red circle, no real fixed rules to follow.
The Navy was its own power. It wasn't like in the West under civilian control. It was under it's own control which is why it didn't have to play second fiddle to the army.
Apart from the big red circle, no real fixed rules to follow.
The Navy was its own power. It wasn't like in the West under civilian control. It was under it's own control which is why it didn't have to play second fiddle to the army.
It may not seem "navy" but the IJN had extensive land based planes, under its own command structure, to protect "naval ports and bases". But after the Pacific war started the IJN had far more Navy planes operating from land bases than carriers, especially in the Solomon Islands and Rabaul which became the largest Japanese airbase outside of Japan.
But for your original question there were many interesting A6M5c in 1945 in "Borneo" region, included examples captured and extensively photographed by the RAAF, including an A6M5c with the extremely rare multiple rocket rails under the wings 2x5 rockets!
As others said after ~April '43 all Zero fighters had a dark black/blue cowling, dark green/blue upper and a light grey/tan underside. Exact shade depends on build factory etc......
